A campus of The California State University

                                                                                                                                                                       

Office of the Academic Senate One Washington SquareSan Jose, California 95192-0024408-924-2440  Fax: 408-924-2451

                                                                                                                                                                                                SS-F06-2

At its meeting of November 20, 2006, the Academic Senate passed the following Sense of the Senate Resolution presented by Senator David for the Curriculum and Research Committee.

 

SENSE OF THE SENATE RESOLUTION

In Support of Revised Program Planning Guidelines

 

Whereas:          Program planning which is evidence-based and future-oriented is essential in order to align program goals and objectives with assessment of student learning outcomes, student recruitment and retention efforts, faculty hiring, interaction with the community, and resource allocation; and

 

Whereas:          Program planning is most useful when the process is completed within a single

academic year so that results are available on a timely basis and is informed by systematic data collected from multiple sources; and  

 

Whereas:          Current program planning guidelines were revised and streamlined in response to new university, college, and department visions, goals, and objectives[1];

                        therefore be it

                       

Resolved:          That the following document, “Program Planning Guidelines” be endorsed by the

                        Academic Senate; and be it further

 

Resolved:          That the Program Planning Committee collect data from programs using the new

                        guidelines and use that input to review and, as necessary, revise the guidelines and report to the Curriculum and Research Committee during the 2009-2010 Academic Year.

 

 

Approved:                     October 16, 2006

Present:                        Peter Buzanski, Toni Campbell, Robert Cooper, Debra David,

                                    Triant Flouris, Benjamin Henderson, Michael Kaufman, Dea Nelson,                                                                    Pam Stacks, Dominique Van Hooff, Beth Von Till

Absent:                         Bill Nance

Vote:                            11 0-0

Financial Impact:           None

Workload Impact:          It is expected to reduce workload related to program planning.

San Jose State University
Program Planning Guidelines

 

AUTHORITY............................................................................................................................... 1

MOTIVATION FOR REVISED POLICY AND GUIDELINES.................................................. 1

PROGRAM PLANNING GOALS.............................................................................................. 1

PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS.......................................................................................... 1

Program Planning for Accredited Programs................................................................................ 3

Primary Steps in Program Planning............................................................................................. 3

Program Planning Procedures.................................................................................................... 5

Program Coordinators........................................................................................................... 5

Undergraduate Programs with More than 120 Units............................................................... 5

Standardized Data and Required Data Elements..................................................................... 6

Role of the Liaison................................................................................................................. 6

Responsibility for Self-Study.................................................................................................. 6

External Reviewers................................................................................................................ 6

Departmental Review and Response...................................................................................... 8

College Curriculum or Other Review Committee's Report...................................................... 8

Dean's Report....................................................................................................................... 8

Program Planning Committee Report..................................................................................... 9

Final Decisions...................................................................................................................... 9

Format of the Self Study.............................................................................................. 9

Accredited Programs................................................................................................................. 9

SECTIONS OF THE SELF STUDY.......................................................................................... 10

Title Page:............................................................................................................................... 10

Table of Contents:................................................................................................................... 10

1. Executive Summary............................................................................................................. 10

2. Context and Scope.............................................................................................................. 11

3. Curriculum and Achievement of Student Learning Outcomes................................................ 11

4. Students.............................................................................................................................. 12

5. Faculty................................................................................................................................ 13

6. Resources........................................................................................................................... 14

Self Study Appendices............................................................................................................ 14

Further Details on Preparing the Self Study................................................... 15

Table 3. Materials Gathered by Coordinators........................................................................... 16

Program Planning Guidelines Appendices.......................................................... 16

Appendix 1: Required Data Elements....................................................................................... 17

Appendix 2: Program Review Schedule................................................................................... 19

Appendix 3: Sample Cover Page for Self-Study Report........................................................... 20

Appendix 4: Five-Year Plan for Faculty Recruitment................................................................ 21

Appendix 5: External Reviewer................................................................................................ 25

Appendix 6: Department Program Planning Checklist............................................................... 28


AUTHORITY

These guidelines are published pursuant to University Policy S94-2, "Organization of the Program Planning Process at SJSU", as amended by S96-10, "Program Planning Process" and F03-4, “Coordination of External Accreditation with Program Planning.” Policy statements shall prevail in case of any conflict with these guidelines. These Guidelines are guided by University Policy S93-14 "Curricular Priorities."

MOTIVATION FOR REVISED GUIDELINES

These revised guidelines are designed to enhance and streamline the current Program Planning Process to foster more effective assessment and planning and to ensure that the effort leads to maximum payoff.  There are two key changes in these guidelines.  (1) The timeline is shorter.  The preparation of the self study is expected to be completed in a single academic year (9 months).  The external review and internal processing of the self study is expected to be completed in a second academic year.  (2) A more focused self study with a strict page limit is defined around a set of required data elements, many of which will be supplied to the department at the beginning of the process. 

PROGRAM PLANNING GOALS

The three key goals of the Program Planning process are:

1)      To promote a continuous internal review and planning process that will provide programs with purposeful future direction.

2)      To serve as a vehicle to help programs support the mission[2] of the university, college, and department.

3)      To provide an opportunity for programs to systematically assess their course offerings, achievement of student learning outcomes, and the faculty and instructional resources necessary for providing an excellent educational experience to students.

PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS

Program planning is evidence-based and future-oriented; program goals and objectives should guide assessment of student learning outcomes, faculty hiring, student recruitment and retention efforts, and interaction with the community. Program planning and evaluation involve faculty at the department, college, and university levels and culminate with the Provost's approval of clearly articulated goals and a corresponding framework for resource management. Typical questions to bear in mind include:

·        What changes in career opportunities, professional practice, technology, or other relevant discipline characteristics are students completing this program likely to face five years from now?

·        What changes are expected in the characteristics or academic backgrounds of students coming into the program five years from now?

·        What changes in the curriculum (e.g., for lifelong learning, good citizenship, living in a complex, multicultural society, etc.) should be in effect five years from now to better prepare students?

·        What alternative modes of instructional delivery will best help students achieve program outcomes?

·        What faculty recruitment and development opportunities are needed during the next five years to support the program?

·        What changes in support resources (e.g., staff, equipment, infrastructure, travel funds, etc.) are needed to maintain or change the program quality, size, and achievement of student learning outcomes in the next five years?

Evidence gathered from student outcomes assessment should inform both curricular and resource decisions.

The unit of analysis is the program, defined as a sequence of studies leading to a degree or teaching credential. Whenever separate descriptions are provided in the University catalog for similar sequences of study, they are treated as different programs to be reviewed. Concentrations are considered to be specialized variants of a more general field, are reviewed as separate programs, and may have different final decisions. Teacher education programs meeting the requirements of the California Commission on Teacher Credential (CCTC) are reviewed as programs. Minors, options, and emphases are reviewed with the degree or program to which they most closely relate.

The focus of program planning is (a) student achievement of the learning outcomes specified in the curriculum, and (b) analysis of the resources and strategic decisions necessary to achieve those outcomes. The process begins with department (or program) faculty preparing a document, called the self-study, describing past achievements, evaluating student learning assessment data, analyzing the current status of student demand and program resources and preparing future goals and priorities.

One or more external experts in the discipline will review the self-study, visit the campus, and provide observations and recommendations in a written report. After program faculty have had an opportunity to respond to the report in writing, the college curriculum or other review committee and the dean, who offer college-wide perspectives on the program, review all relevant documents. The college committee and the dean provide written responses to the self study and external review and recommend actions stated in Section V(A) of University Policy S96-10 namely, (i) acceptance of the plan without modification, (ii) provisional acceptance of the plan with suggestions for improvement and/or requests for additional information, (iii) rejection of the plan for explicit reasons, or (iv) initiation of program termination review for specific reasons. These documents are next reviewed by the University Program Planning Committee (PPC), which provides a university-wide perspective on the program and makes recommendations to the Provost. The Provost (or the Provost’s designee), dean and department chair (or other faculty member designated for this purpose) will discuss program recommendations and plans. This will lead to an administrative planning document that will be kept in the Program Planning files, and also in program and college files.  It is expected that programs and colleges will refer to this administrative planning document and any amendments made to it when requesting faculty positions, proposing major curricular actions, or initiating other major changes in program activity.

The Office of Undergraduate Studies will be the official site of records and is responsible for electronic distribution to concerned entitities.

Program Planning for Accredited Programs

 

In accordance with University Policy F03-4, the Program Planning Committee (PPC) coordinates the timing of program reviews with those of external accreditation agencies. Programs normally are scheduled for review once every five academic years except for programs that have an accreditation cycle that is other than five years.  According to University Policy F03-4, the program planning cycle for accredited programs will be coordinated with accreditation cycles up to seven years in length.  If the accreditation cycle is greater than seven years, then there will be one program planning cycle between successive accreditation cycles.  For departments in which only some of the degree programs are accredited, the other programs will go through the program planning process at the same time as the accredited programs. The format of the self study for accredited programs is discussed later in these guidelines. 


Primary Steps in Program Planning

The primary steps and timeline in program planning are summarized in Table 1.  The events of the external reviewer visit are summarized in Table 2.

Table 1. Summary of Program Planning Timeline

Self-Study Preparation Year

Events

Deadline date:

May occur at any time before deadline

Primary Responsible Party/Parties

Call issued for appointment of coordinators for all programs to be reviewed during following academic year

Beginning of fall semester

Office of Undergraduate Studies (UGS)

Initiate process to identify suitable external reviewers for programs as paid consultants

Beginning of fall semester

Departments

Informational meeting held with department program planning coordinators and department chairs to distribute guidelines and identify liaisons for the program review

During September

(before October 1)

Program Planning Committee (PPC)

University-provided data elements delivered to the department

By October 1

UGS in consultation with the Office of Institutional Research, Faculty Affairs and SJSU Foundation

Negotiated schedule (see Guidelines Appendix 2) for major tasks of the review, signed by the Department Program Planning Coordinator, Department Chair, Dean, and University PPC Liaison, to be filed with the Office of Undergraduate Studies

Schedule approved by Dean and forwarded to UGS by Nov. 15

Department Program Planning Coordinator,  University PPC Liaison, and College Dean

 

Justification for unit requirements in excess of 120 units approved by department and college curriculum committees delivered to UGS for action by the Undergraduate Studies Committee and the Curriculum and Research Committee

By November 1

Department and College Dean's Office

Assemble all documents needed to prepare self study

December 1

Department

 

Provide the vitae of three External Reviewers to the College Dean (in the case of accreditation reviews, this is handled by the accreditation agency).

April 1

Department

Completed self study due to Dean for review and approval

May 1

Department

Forward to Undergraduate Studies two copies of the approved self study (signed by College Dean) along with an electronic copy and the Dean’s recommendation for an external reviewer

May 15

Department and College Dean

Send approved self study to the external reviewer.

July 1

Department

Program Review Year

Confirm availability of external reviewer and schedule visit with all concerned parties (Dean, Vice Provost for Planning and Budget, AVP Undergraduate Studies, AVP Graduate Studies and Research (if graduate program is involved), Director of Assessment, and PPC liaison. 

September 1

Department

External Reviewer Visit

By November 1

Department

External Review received (electronically) by UGS and Department

By December 1

Reviewer

Response to External Reviewer’s Report or memo saying that no response is required from the department sent to College Dean and UGS (electronically)

By December 20

Department

College Committee Report with endorsement of or addendum from the College Dean sent to UGS for consideration by the PPC (hardcopy and electronically)

By March 15

College Dean

PPC report to Provost

By April 30

PPC

Department and Dean meet with the Provost

Month of May

Provost’s Office

 

Table 2. Site Visit Schedule

Site Visit by External Reviewer; meet with students, faculty, staff, administrators, and other relevant constituencies

Late fall of academic year scheduled for completion of review

Department Program Planning Coordinator in consultation with the Provost's Office and the Office of Undergraduate Studies

Initial interview of External Reviewer with AVP for Undergraduate Studies and, where appropriate, the AVP for Graduate Studies & Research

Early on first day of Site Visit

Department Program Planning Coordinator in consultation with the AVP’s

Exit Meeting: External Reviewer presents initial findings/impressions to Provost; AVP for Undergraduate Studies, AVP for Graduate Studies & Research (where appropriate); college dean; department chair and faculty; PPC liaison; University Director of Assessment; students majoring in program under review; other relevant constituencies

At conclusion of reviewer's Site Visit

Department Program Planning Coordinator in consultation with the Provost's Office and the Office of Undergraduate Studies

 

Program Planning Procedures

Program Coordinators.

At the beginning of each fall semester, the Office of Undergraduate Studies will call for appointment of coordinators for all programs to be reviewed during that academic year and initiate consultation to find suitable external reviewers to serve as paid consultants.

In September, the University PPC will hold an informational meeting with the departmental program planning coordinators (and the chairs, if different from the coordinators). At this meeting, the guidelines will be distributed, along with the names of the liaison members of the PPC designated for each of the programs to be reviewed.

By November 15, the program planning coordinators and liaisons, in consultation with the College Dean, will file negotiated schedules for the major tasks of program planning with the Office of Undergraduate Studies.

It is the responsibility of the coordinator to invite the PPC liaison to all relevant meetings including exit interviews and college committee deliberations.

Undergraduate Programs with More than 120 Units.

If the department has undergraduate programs that require more than 120 units and does not intend to reduce the requirement to 120 units during the program planning cycle, by November 1 the department will provide the appropriate request materials to the Undergraduate Studies Committee, which will make a recommendation on the request to the Curriculum and Research Committee of the Academic Senate. 

Standardized Data and Required Data Elements.

By October 1 the University will provide the department with the required data elements that are available from the Office of Institutional Research, Undergraduate Studies, Faculty Affairs and the SJSU Foundation (see Appendix 1).  By December 1, the coordinator will have completed collection of the required data elements to be provided by the department and the college, with the exception of additional assessment data that may be collected in the spring

Role of the Liaison.

Each program will be assigned a liaison from the University PPC. Liaisons are responsible for tracking program planning as the process occurs in the department, and for reporting to the PPC monthly on the progress made, and on problems that may occur. Also, the liaison assists the department in interpreting the guidelines and requirements of the program planning process. The liaison usually prepares a draft of the final report on behalf on the PPC, which is the basis for committee action and for the summary reports. The liaison acts on behalf of the PPC and shall be invited to all relevant meetings including exit interviews and college committee deliberations.

Responsibility for Self-Study.

Although provisions are made for departments to name coordinators for program planning purposes, department chairs have the ultimate responsibility to ensure that all tasks necessary to develop a self-study are assigned. Chairs are expected periodically to check on the progress made toward accomplishing those tasks, making adjustments as needed. Typically, the self-study should be completed and the external reviewer selected (see Appendix 5 and sections that follow for further details) by May 15. The self-study should be placed into the last section of a three-ring binder having the following dividers, in this order: "Decisions", "Program Planning Committee", "College Committee", "External Review and Responses", and "Self-Study.” Additional material is added to the front of the binder as planning progresses. Two copies of the completed self-study should be sent to Undergraduate Studies.  The College Dean and the Department should also retain copies.

External Reviewers.

Selection

If the program is reviewed by an external accrediting agency, the SJSU Office of Undergraduate Studies funds the accrediting team visits. The departments are responsible, however, for making arrangements for the visit of the team as directed by the accrediting agency. For all other programs, the department normally recommends two to three external reviewers to the Dean. The Dean sends his/her recommendations to the AVP of Undergraduate Studies who is responsible for the final decision. (See Appendix 5 for selection criteria, budget, and consultation procedures for selecting the external reviewer.) Before the self-study is completed, the Provost's Office will make arrangements for an appropriate external reviewer, including payment of expenses and an honorarium.

Role

After the selection of the external reviewer by the Provost (typically designated to the AVP of Undergraduate Studies), the department confirms the external reviewer’s willingness to serve and sends an approved copy of the self study to the external reviewer. The Office of Undergraduate Studies will provide the external reviewer with a copy of these guidelines, curricular priorities, a formal letter of invitation, and other relevant additional information such as CSU system information, particularly for reviewers who are not from a CSU campus. This material shall be sent at least one month prior to the visit. The role of the external reviewer is to bring an informed and dispassionate view to his/her evaluation of the plan as presented. Does the plan respond to the assessment materials included in the report? Does it flow reasonably out of the current condition of the program? Does it respond to the university "Statement of Curricular Priorities"? Does it recognize important trends in the discipline, both nationally and as they may be reflected in the regional metropolitan area served by San José State University? Do the planned activities related to faculty, students, and community provide measurable guidelines for the program for the next five years? Do they address educational needs of the diverse community of which SJSU is a part? Clearly, faculty in the program hope that they have achieved those objectives, but it is the external reviewer's privilege and responsibility to evaluate that achievement.

Site Visit.

During the site visit, the external reviewer should meet students, faculty, staff, and administrators. A separate interview will be held early on the first day with the AVP for Undergraduate Studies and, where appropriate, the AVP for Graduate Studies. At the end of the visit, the external reviewer is asked to present initial impressions and findings at an "exit meeting", to which any party concerned is invited. Those specifically invited shall include the Vice Provost, the AVP for Graduate Studies and Research (if any graduate programs are under review), the AVP for Undergraduate Studies, the college dean, the department chair, the faculty of the department, the liaison member of the Program Planning Committee, the University Director of Assessment, and students who are majoring in any of the programs under review. Representatives from other areas of the University may be asked to attend on request of the dean.

Reviewer's report.

The evaluation report should be guided by information in Appendix 5, "Role of the external reviewer.” It must include recommendations for change if the external reviewer's evaluation finds that the plan is inadequate. Recommendations should be based on comparison with other programs in institutions and communities that are similar to SJSU. The length of the report should be appropriate to the complexity of the plans and the external reviewer's assessment of their contribution to the quality of the program(s) during the next five years. The format of the report is left to the external reviewer's discretion. Three possible organizations are: (a) subdivide the report into sections representing curriculum, faculty, students, non-faculty resources, and community interaction, (b) subdivide the report in the same fashion as the self-study, or (c) subdivide the report into responses to specific recommendations for the next five years as summarized in the Executive Summary.

The external reviewer's report should be submitted to the Office of Undergraduate Studies within three weeks after completion of the site visit, and no later than December 1. The Office of Undergraduate Studies will then distribute the report to the dean, department chair, department program planning coordinator, University Program Planning Committee liaison, and the Office of Graduate Studies, where appropriate.

Departmental Review and Response.

Within three weeks after receipt of the external reviewer's report and no later than December 20, the department program planning coordinator reviews the report and forwards the report, along with any response, to the college curriculum or other review committee. The department program planning coordinator sends a copy of any departmental response to the external reviewer’s report to the Office of Undergraduate Studies and the University Program Planning Committee liaison.

College Curriculum or Other Review Committee's Report.

Upon receipt of these materials from the department program planning coordinator, the college committee prepares a written report, commenting on the self-study from a college-wide perspective, and recommending one of the actions stated in Section V(A) of University Policy S96-10 namely, (i) acceptance of the plan without modification, (ii) provisional acceptance of the plan with suggestions for improvement and/or requests for additional information, (iii) rejection of the plan for explicit reasons, or (iv) initiation of program termination review for specific reasons. The report is thereafter provided to the department, the dean, the Office of Undergraduate Studies, and the University Program Planning Committee liaison, and is due in sufficient time that the dean can endorse the report or add additional comments by March 15.

The college committee report will be placed in the "College Review" section of the binder.  Disposition of the binder depends on the committee's recommended action. If the committee recommends action (i), (iii), or (iv) above, the binder is sent to the college dean's office; if the committee, recommends action (ii), the binder is returned to the department for insertion of the additional information (this action extends the timeline and requires modification to schedule). When a binder is returned to the department for additional information, the department places the additional information in the "Self-Study" section of the binder and also places a memorandum in the "College Review" section of the binder that references the additional information that has been provided.

Dean's Report.

After reviewing all relevant documents, the dean either accepts the College Committee report or adds an addendum and submits the report to the Office of Undergraduate Studies, and University Program Planning Committee liaison, with copies of any addenda to the department chair, department program planning coordinator.  The dean’s approval or addenda should be received by March 15.

Program Planning Committee Report.

The Office of Undergraduate Studies notifies the Program Planning Committee that the binder is available for review. Within one month, the liaison member of the Program Planning Committee reviews the binder and makes a presentation which may include a draft report to the full committee about the program plan, including observations made while working with the department coordinator and after attending the external reviewer's exit meeting and the college committee meeting. After discussion, the liaison member drafts (or revises) a final report, which the Committee may adopt with or without modifications as appropriate. The final actions of the PPC are reported to the Provost prior to April 1.

The PPC may recommend several actions to the Provost as stated in Section V(A) of University Policy S96-10 namely, (i) acceptance of the plan without modification, (ii) provisional acceptance of the plan with suggestions for improvement and/or requests for additional information, (iii) rejection of the plan for explicit reasons, or (iv) initiation of program termination review for specific reasons.

Final Decisions

The Provost (or designee) will schedule a meeting with the Chair/Director and the Dean, and other administrators as needed.  The outcome of the meeting will be an administrative planning document that will be kept in the Program Planning files, and also in program and college files.  It is expected that programs and colleges will refer to this administrative planning document and any amendments made to it when requesting faculty positions, proposing major curricular actions, or initiating other major changes in program activity.  A copy of the administrative planning document will be placed in the binder and the entire binder maintained in the Office of the Provost. 

Format of the Self Study

The self study is to be organized according to the format described herein, which is in alignment with the Curricular Priorities statement in S93-14.  The self study can contain as many appendices as the department may wish, but the main text (the Sections 1 through 6) is to be no more than 25 pages for a department with one degree program. Departments that offer two or more degree programs, concentrations, or interdisciplinary programs in conjunction with other departments can add an additional five pages per program to the main text, appropriately expanding Sections 1 through 6. For example, a department with both an undergraduate and a graduate degree will have a maximum of 30 pages to incorporate both programs into Sections 1 through 6.

The self study is to be placed in a binder with, at minimum, the following dividers, in this order, "Decisions", "Program Planning Committee", "College Review", "External Review and Program Response", and "Self-Study."

Accredited Programs

For Program Planning purposes, all accredited programs must prepare, at minimum, an Executive Summary and Table of Contents formatted according to Program Planning Guidelines.  Specifics of the content of the Executive Summary and Table of Contents are found in “Sections of the Self Study” below. The table of contents will serve to map the accreditation self-study onto the University self-study format, so that the accreditation self-study can be used as is without revision. When accreditation agency criteria do not require, or inadequately address, one or more Program Planning criteria (for example, assessment) the accreditation self-study must be supplemented accordingly. Questions regarding sufficiency of accreditation criteria should be discussed between the program coordinator and the PPC.

SECTIONS OF THE SELF STUDY

Within each section, the self-study should provide an analysis of the current status of the program(s), any changes since the previous program review, and expected or recommended changes for the next five years. All criteria must be fully discussed, and, to the extent possible, relevant assessment data should be used to support analyses. Appendices should be used for presentation of detailed data, while the narrative sections of the self-study should provide interpretation, context, perspective, and analysis.

Title Page:

The title page should provide the name of the instructional unit: The school, department, or program offering the academic program. A list of academic programs: Include official titles of authorized degrees and concentrations. Include any program added within the last five years. Such programs are not usually required to be reviewed; however, the faculty may wish to comment on these programs in the self-study report and provide information regarding their present status. Date the self-study report was completed. Places for signatures of the Program head and College Dean indicating that the self-study is ready for review.  A sample title page is found in Appendix 3.

Table of Contents:

The table of contents should include a listing of all sections and appendices of the self study with corresponding page numbers.

In the case of accredited programs, the table of contents will match the sections delineated here, while the page numbers will match the accreditation self-study report.  The goal is for SJSU readers to be able to find the corresponding sections in the attached accreditation report.  When accreditation agency criteria do not require, or inadequately address, one or more Program Planning criteria, the accreditation self-study must be supplemented accordingly.  When a department has both accredited and non-accredited programs, a self study is required for the non-accredited programs.

1. Executive Summary

This section of no more than five pages provides the reader with a quick summary of the key recommendations resulting from the self-study. The contents of the executive summary should be organized as follows:

 

1.1 Description of the Department and its Program(s):

·         Briefly describe the organization of the departmental program(s) and provide indicators of size such as FTEF, FTES, and degrees awarded per year.

·         Include information about any significant additions to the program(s) since the last program review.

 

1.2 Synopsis of the Previous Program Review Recommendations (A complete description is placed in Appendix A):

·         Summarize progress on recommendations made in the last program review.

·         Include the rationale for recommendations which were deferred or abandoned since the previous program review.

·         Include any issues from the last review that are still pending. Refer to the appropriate section(s) in this self-study report where these issues are addressed.

 

1.3 Summary of Present Program Review Recommendations:

List the recommendations described throughout the self-study under the appropriate subsections as follows: (Do not discuss or describe their rationale here.)

1.3.1 Curricular Recommendations

1.3.2 Student Recommendations

1.3.3 Faculty Recommendations

1.3.4 Resource Recommendations

For each recommendation, refer to the section(s) in the self-study where the issues, rationale, and recommendations are discussed in detail.

2. Context and Scope

This section contains a brief description of the structure of the department and the program(s) under review. Include a discussion of how the program(s) are aligned with the missions/goals of the college and university, and the scope of the review described in the self-study.  (Suggested length: 1 page)

3. Curriculum and Achievement of Student Learning Outcomes

3.1 Curriculum

a.       Briefly summarize the current curriculum for each degree program. For graduate degree programs, summarize the required culminating experiences (thesis, oral exam, written exam, etc.). Include catalog descriptions of each degree program in self-study Appendix E.

b.      Summarize all curricular changes since the last review, including changes that are now pending. Include the rationale for these changes.

c.       If your program differs from standard curricula in your discipline, please explain how and why.

d.      Describe any curricular bottlenecks, (e.g, required or prerequisite courses which are either oversubscribed in enrollment or offered so infrequently as to impede student progress).  Explain the plan to alleviate such problems in section 3.4.

e.       If applicable, describe to what extent your program is interdisciplinary.

 

3.2 General Education and Service Courses

a.       Summarize the General Education courses taught in the program. Include any bottlenecks in the delivery of General Education courses.

b.      Summarize any service courses.  Evaluate how well the courses meet the needs of the departments/programs being served.

c.       Describe any management/resource challenges in offering your department’s mix of General Education, service courses and courses required for the major.

 

3.3 Assessment of student learning

a.       Summarize the process for regular department review of learning objectives, courses, and curricular structures (described in detail in the assessment plan included in self-study Appendix D).

b.      Evaluate the procedures in place for collecting and analyzing the evidence that program goals are being achieved. Include procedures that are in place for assessing student learning.

c.       Evaluate the results of assessment efforts with particular attention to modifications that have been made to improve student achievement of learning goals and outcomes.

 

3.4 Goals and Plans

Make curricular recommendations in this section.  This section must include a discussion of how assessment results are being used for program planning.  Evaluate the intended learning outcomes of all the programs being reviewed, and revise if appropriate. Provide the rationale for any recommendations in light of the information collected and analyzed. A summary listing of the recommendations (without their rationale) is to be provided in Section 1.3.1.

4. Students

4.1 Analysis of Student Data

a.       Use the Data Elements from the past five years provided in Appendix C to comment on status and trends in: (a) number of applicants to each program; (b) number of majors; (c) number of graduates, and (d) gender and ethnicity ratios of program majors in the context of the University at large and your college(s).

b.      Summarize any available information on where your students go after completing your degree programs (e.g., employment, graduate school)

 

4.2 Student Experiences

a.       Evaluate student advising procedures. In self-study Appendix F, include degree road-maps and other important advising materials (including electronic resources such as website URLs).

b.      Identify tutoring or special assistance, services, or activities that are regularly provided to students to assist in achieving academic goals.

c.       Where available, analyze student responses to program questionnaires, exit interviews, and/or alumni surveys. What key issues emerge from student perspectives?

 

4.3 Student Recruitment and Retention

a.       Describe the effectiveness of your process for student recruitment, including recruiting underrepresented students. 

b.      Describe the effectiveness of your process for student retention. In particular, describe any process for retaining underrepresented students. 

c.       Describe the mechanisms in place for ensuring that students are graduating in a timely manner.

d.      In self-study Appendix F, include important samples of outreach brochures and/or website URLs describing your programs.

 

4.4 Student Scholarly and Creative Achievements

a.       Summarize the involvement of students in research, scholarship activities (exhibitions, publications, etc.), and other scholarly or creative works.

 

4.5. Student Engagement Activities

a.       Summarize the service and engagement activities of the students to the University.

b.      Summarize current student interactions and engagement with the community, the professional field, or other outside groups.

 

4.6 Goals and Plans

      Make recommendations regarding students in this section. Provide the rationale for recommendations in light of the information analyzed above. A summary listing of the recommendations (without their rationale) is to be provided in Section 1.3.2.

5. Faculty

5.1 Faculty profile

a.       Summarize the profile (e.g., gender, rank, ethnicity) of the tenured and tenure-track faculty, noting the estimated schedule of expected retirements. 

b.      Summarize the profile (e.g., gender, number of years teaching at SJSU, ethnicity) of the full- and part-time lecturers contributing to the program(s), noting any recent trends.

c.       Identify any issues that the profiles may present in the next five years.

 

5.2 Faculty Scholarly and Creative Achievements

a.       Summarize the scholarly and creative achievements of the faculty as a whole in the areas of:

1)      research and publications;

2)      creative works;

3)      grant activity.

b.      Summarize any notable research and creative work collaborations between your faculty and faculty in other disciplines within the college, other colleges of the University, and other institutions.

c.       If you include faculty resumes in self-study Appendix G,  please limit them to a current two-page resume for all tenured/tenure track faculty and full-time lecturers.

 

5.3. Service and Community Engagement

a.       Summarize and reflect on faculty service to the University.

b.      Summarize and reflect on faculty service and engagement with the community, the professional field, or other outside groups.

 

5.4 Goals and Plans

Summarize your hiring plan (self-study Appendix B), with associated rationale.

Make other faculty recommendations in this section. Provide the rationale for them in light of the information collected and analyzed. A summary listing of the recommendations (without their rationale) is to be provided in Section 1.3.3.

6. Resources

6.1 Program Support

a.       Analyze the adequacy and effectiveness of the program's clerical support, technical support staff, and other instructional support.

b.      Analyze the adequacy and effectiveness of the program's equipment and facilities.

c.       Identify any external funding (contracts, grants, gifts, etc.) received by the program to support its instructional program.

d.      Evaluate the adequacy of library holdings and related informational resources.

 

6.2 Resource Management

a.       Describe the process for distribution/allocation of resources within the program(s).

b.      Reflect on resource utilization in relation to level of instruction for the period under review (e.g., ratio of Part-time faculty to Full-time faculty, faculty teaching workload balance, etc.). This analysis should be completed using the data in self-study Appendix C.

c.       Prioritize any instructional support needs in order of importance to the program.

 

6.3 Goals and Plans

Make resources recommendations in this section. Provide the rationale for any recommendations in light of the information collected and analyzed. A summary listing of the recommendations (without their rationale) is to be provided in Section 1.3.4.

Self Study Appendices

Appendix A:  Recommendations from Previous Program Planning Cycle

Discussion of how department addressed the recommendations from the previous program planning committee review report.

 

Appendix B: 5-Year Plan for Faculty Recruitment

Modifications to 5-year plan for faculty recruitment (See guidelines Appendix 4) should be consistent with new Provost hiring plan.

 

Appendix C: Required Data Elements

The required data elements are discussed in Appendix 1 of the Program Planning Guidelines. Elements of the required data elements will be supplied by the Office of Undergraduate Studies, other elements are the responsibility of the Dean and the Department.

 

Appendix D: Assessment Plan and Assessment Results

This appendix should include, program learning outcomes, mapping of degree student learning outcomes to the courses in the major, the assessment plan for the department/programs, relevant data, assessment reports submitted to the university each semester and other relevant assessment materials.

 

Appendix E: Catalog Copy

 

Appendix F: Student Outreach and Advising Materials

Include the roadmap for each degree and other representative outreach and advising materials.

 

Appendix G: Faculty Resumes (Optional)

Include faculty resumes of no more than two pages each, covering only the period of review (generally the last five years).

Further Details on Preparing the Self Study

The department should designate one faculty member as Department Program Planning Coordinator who will be responsible for coordinating the development of each self-study. This faculty member, often (but not necessarily) the department chair, will work with a member of the University Program Planning Committee who has been assigned liaison responsibilities and the Office of Undergraduate Studies, who provides staff support to the University Program Planning Committee. Most departments will have more than one program to be reviewed during a given review cycle.

In preparing the self-study, program faculty should review existing catalog descriptions of the curriculum, previous program planning documents, assessment data gathered by the department, and the University-provided components of the required data elements. Additional information may be gathered and considered.

The Coordinator should begin by collecting at least the materials set forth in Table 3, as follows:


Table 3. Materials Gathered by Coordinators

Document or Published Information

Source(s)

Current Program Planning Guide
(this document, including attachments)

Office of Undergraduate Studies web site

Previous department or program planning documents (self-study or accreditation reports and related recommendations and responses)

Department Office, Dean's Office, or Office of Undergraduate Studies

Required Data Elements

Undergraduate Studies, College, Department

Catalog copy describing the program(s), including updates which may not as yet have appeared

Office of Undergraduate Studies,
Graduate Studies & Research.  See   web site address: http://webdev.sjsu.edu

Annual statements of program revenue
(by source of funds)

Department Office, Dean's Office, Institutional Planning & Resources, Reports to the Academic Senate, International & Extended Studies, Foundation

Annual statements of program expenditures

Department Office, Dean's Office, Continuing Education, Foundation

Representative student advising materials

Department Office

Description of departmental procedures for assessing student achievements

Department Office

Evidence from assessments and surveys conducted over the period of the review (assessment results, surveys of majors, graduation surveys, alumni surveys)

Department Office, Dean’s Office

Summary of faculty accomplishments, including externally funded grants

Department Office and colleagues

Summaries from any advisory boards

Department Office

Summaries of community service/outreach activities

Department Office and colleagues

Program Planning Guidelines Appendices

1.   Required Data Elements

2.   Sample Program Planning Schedule

3.   Sample Title Page

4.   Sample Faculty Recruitment Planning Forms

5.   Information Regarding External Reviewer

6.   Department Program Planning Checklist


Appendix 1: Required Data Elements

By October 1 the University will provide the department with required data elements A through D.

 

A. Provided by Undergraduate Studies in Consultation with the Office of Institutional Research.

Student Profile

 

Data for the last five years will be available on the Office of Institutional Research website (at www.oir.sjsu.edu).

 

1.      Enrollment Patterns (in the major and concentration):

·        Headcount and full-time equivalent – students (FTE/S) broken down by lower division, upper division, credential and graduate students

·        Headcount and full-time equivalent – students (FTE/S) for lecture, lab/activity courses, and supervision courses broken down by lower division, upper division, credential and graduate students

·        Enrollment yield (applied-admitted-enrolled) analyses broken down by first time freshmen, new undergraduate transfers, and new graduate students

·        Enrollment trends broken down by gender and ethnicity

 

2.      Degrees awarded (in the major and concentration):

·        Headcount broken down for undergraduate and graduate students by gender and ethnicity

·        Graduation rates for native students and undergraduate transfers

 

Student Academic Performance

 

Data is available on the Office of Institutional Research website (at www.oir.sjsu.edu).

 

·        Grading distribution

·        Grade Point Average

·        Students on Probation

 

Faculty Profile and Course Information

 

Data on faculty for the last five years is available on the Office of Institutional Research website (at www.oir.sjsu.edu).

 

1.      Faculty Profile

·        Headcount and full-time equivalent – faculty (FTE/F) broken down by tenure status (tenured, tenure-track, FERPS, full-time temporary, part-time temporary and teaching assistants)

·        Student/Faculty Ratio (SFR)

·        Gender and ethnic composition

 

2.      Course Information

·        Number of sections offered broken down by course level (lower division, upper division and graduate)

·        Average section size

·        Proportion taught by tenured/tenure-track/FERP faculty

 

 

B. Provided by Undergraduate Studies in Consultation with Faculty Affairs

 

·        Five-year number of tenured/tenure-track searches and number filled

·        Five-year number of retirements, and number of resignations.

·        Five-year gender and ethnic distribution of the faculty

 

C. Provided by Undergraduate Studies in Consultation with the SJSU Foundation

 

·        Five-year number of grant applications, number of grants funded, total dollars funded

 

D. Provided by Undergraduate Studies

 

·        Mission and goals statement for the University

·        Electronic copy of the current catalog for each major

 

E. Provided by the college dean’s office

 

·        Five-year salary and O&E budget, and FTE/S target if assigned.

·        Five-year Continuing Education (open university and special session) income and end-of year balance

·        Mission and goals statement for the college.

 

F. Provided by Department

 

Curriculum Profile

                       

·        Five-year number of major, GE, and other service courses offered

·        Proportion taught by tenured/tenure-track/FERP faculty

·        Roadmap for each degree program

·        Assessment plan, data, and results

 

 


Appendix 2: Program Review Schedule

(Due to Office of Undergraduate Studies by November 15)

 

                                                Scheduled Review Completion  ____________

 

Degree BA      BS      MA      MS      Other  ____________

 

Program         ______________________________________________________

 

Department    ________________________          Chair   ____________________

 

College          ________________________          Dean   ____________________

 

                                                                                    Date

 

Submit vitae of proposed external reviewers         __________________________

          to Dean

 

Dean submits ranked reviewers to UGS                __________________________

 

Submit Self Study to UGS and PPC Liaison            __________________________

 

Send Self Study to External Reviewer                  __________________________

 

Site Visit                                                       __________________________

 

External Reviewer’s Report received by                __________________________

Office of UGS

 

Department forwards any response to                 __________________________

          College Dean & Office of UGS

 

College Committee Report with Endorsement         __________________________

          of Collage Dean sent to UGS

 

PPC Report to PPC Committee                            __________________________

 

PPC Report to Provost                                      __________________________

 

Meeting of Provost, Dean, Chair/Director                       __________________________

 

 

 

PPC Liaison _____________________  Signature ________________ Date  ________

 

Chair/Director____________________  Signature ________________ Date  ________

 

Dean           _____________________  Signature ________________ Date  ________

 

Undergraduate Studies_________________ Signature ________________ Date  ________


Appendix 3: Sample Cover Page for Self-Study Report

SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY
PROGRAM PLANNING SELF-STUDY
(NAME OF INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT AND COLLEGE)

Programs (add or delete degree programs as appropriate):

                    B.A. in ------

                    B.S. in ------

                    B.S. in ------

 

                                    Concentration in-----

                                    Concentration in-----

 

                    M.A. in-----

                    M.S. in-----

                    Joint Ph D. in-----

(DATE)

The enclosed self-study report has been reviewed by the faculty in the instructional unit and is now submitted for external review. 

(signature of Department or Program Head)

 

Department/Program Head

Date

 

 

Draft has been read and deemed ready for external review by:

 

(signature of College Dean)

 

College Dean

Date

Dated signature of department/program head: This signature serves to verify that there has been widespread faculty participation, including faculty in interdisciplinary programs, in the preparation of the self-study report and that the faculty are aware of all findings and recommendations.

Dated signatures of the College Dean: This signature indicates that the self-study report is complete and ready for external review. It does not necessarily indicate agreement with the recommendations in the self-study report.


Appendix 4: Five-Year Plan for Faculty Recruitment

 

School/Department __________________      College ________________________

 

Inclusive Years _____________________________

 

This form is designed to facilitate the program planning process and the request for authorization to conduct searches for tenure-track faculty.  Initially you must complete the entire form.  Subsequent requests to conduct searches (up to 5 years after initially completing this form) require that you update only the position announcement and sections III.2.a, III.2.b, III.3 and IV.  Please continue, however, to submit a complete 5-year plan with each request.

 

I.    Curricular Responsibilities/Faculty Competencies

 

The objective of this section is to develop a profile of faculty competencies required to meet current curricular responsibilities. You should assume that the number of equivalent full-time faculty will remain approximately the same over the next five years.  Please reference or attach any documents explaining anticipated changes in curricular responsibilities, and describe responsibilities at the level of specificity required to identify faculty competencies (i.e., by major, concentration, or course level).

 

1.                   Identify current curricular responsibilities and the number of full-time equivalent faculty required for each.

 

2.                   Identify regular faculty currently performing these responsibilities, noting by year any retirements anticipated in the next five years.

 

Curricular

Responsibilities

Equivalent Full-

Time Faculty

 

Names of Faculty

 

Retirement Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

II.  Anticipated Needs

 

To allow flexibility for changes in course offerings and enrollments, the number of regular (tenure-track and tenured) faculty should be limited to a maximum of 80 percent of the of full-time faculty equivalent.  Although FERP faculty need not be counted in calculating this percentage, they must be considered in deciding if 80 percent is a reasonable norm: assignments for all FERP faculty must be covered in departmental/school allocations.  All new participants in FERP represent faculty competencies that will need to be replaced after the five-year term in the program has expired.

 

1.       Program needs and 80 percent limitation may require retraining or reassignment of regular faculty.  If so, please indicate if such a situation exists and identify when and how retraining or reassignment may be accomplished.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.       Identify those needs (other than replacement of regular faculty on leaves) for which you expect to be hiring temporary faculty.  (Remember that this category should be .20 FTE/F.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.       Identify those specializations or responsibilities for which you anticipate making tenure-track requests and the year in which you anticipate recruitment.  Plans for recruitment at other than assistant professor rank must be accompanied by documentation that there is a need for program or departmental/school leadership or that the number of available candidates is limited.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

III.    Annual Request and Program Review Documentation (if a five-year plan has been submitted within the last five years, this section and section IV must be updated; attach this updated section and section IV to the most recent program review relevant to curricular development/faculty competencies.)

 

1.   Attach position announcements for the areas of specialization for which you wish to conduct searches this year.  Announcements must clearly identify the qualifications that will constitute screening criteria, and the responsibilities which appointees will be expected to perform.

 

 

2.a  Using the following formula, calculate the percentage of equivalent full-time faculty positions filled by tenure-track and tenured faculty if recruitment is successful.

 

            (1)        Number of full-time tenured faculty                                            _____________

                                (Do not count administrators with full-time assignments

                                outside the department/school.)

 

            (2)        Number of tenure-track faculty                                                  _____________

            (3)        Number of tenure-track searches extended                                 _____________

            (4)        Number of tenure-track searches proposed                                 _____________

            (5)        Present year’s allocation (in equivalent full-time positions)            _____________

            (6)        [(1) through (4)] divided by (5)                                                   _____________

 

b.       Identify other factors affecting actual or potential use of allocation.

 

            (1)        Number of faculty on Pre-Retirement or FERP                           _____________

            (2)        Number of full-time administrators with retreat rights                   _____________

            (3)        Number of faculty regularly teaching outside the department/

                        school (note time fraction and department)                                  _____________

            (4)        Amount of administrative time and assigned time currently

            allocated to department chair/school director                               _____________

 

3.   Add supplementary information regarding the position request, including for example, revisions to the five-year plan, additional documentation supporting a request to hire at an advanced level or above the 80 percent limitation, or particular expectations to be written into the appointment letter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV.       Department Diversity Profile Overview / Tenured & Tenure-Track Faculty

 

 

1.          Department Gender and Racial / Ethnic Breakdown, tenured and tenure-track faculty.  

 

                                                                                                              # of Male      # of Female

African American & African

 

 

Asian / Pacific Islander

(Asian Indian, Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Guamanian / Chamorro, Hawaiian, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Samoan, Vietnamese ).

 

 

Hispanic

(Cuban, Mexican / American, American / Chicano, Puerto Rican, Other Latin American origin ).

 

 

American Indian / Alaskan Native

(Original peoples of North America with cultural identification maintained through tribal affiliation or community recognition ).

 

 

White

(Original peoples of Europe, North Africa,  or Middle East, not of Hispanic origin ).

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

2.              Provide a brief overview of gender, racial / ethnic diversity of doctoral degree recipients

             ( or other terminal degree recipients ) in your discipline [e.g. Doctorate Recipients from   

             United States Universities:  Summary Report 2004. (2005).  Chicago:  NORC.]

           

          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.                   What are the outreach efforts the department will employ?

 

               

 


Appendix 5: External Reviewer

 

1. Role of External Reviewer

 

The reviewer’s role is to bring an informed and dispassionate view to the assessment of the plan as it is presented. Does it respond to the assessment materials included in the report? Does it flow reasonably out of the current condition of the program? Does it respond to the university "Statement of Curricular Priorities?" Does it recognize important trends in the discipline, both nationally and as they may be reflected in the metropolitan area served by San José State University? Do the planned activities related to faculty, students, and community lead to measurable outcomes for the program in the next five years? Does it address the educational needs of the diverse community of which SJSU is a part? Clearly, the faculty in the program hope they have achieved those objectives, but it is the reviewer’s privilege and responsibility to evaluate that achievement.

 

Before visiting the campus, the reviewer should review the Program Plan submitted by the Department. The current Program Plan, along with the program data from the last five years, should be sent to the reviewer at least a month prior to the site visit. The plan provides the framework within which the faculty and the program intend to operate over the next five years. It should focus on the curriculum as the blueprint for all activity during that time. The curriculum, as a manifestation of the program’s goals and objectives, should guide faculty hiring, student recruitment and retention, and interaction with the community. It should indicate awareness of the pluralistic community in which SJSU exists. If it does not do that, then the "plan" realistically cannot be implemented.

 

During the visit, the reviewer will meet with students, faculty, and administrators. An initial interview will be held on the first day with the Dean, the Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies and, as appropriate, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Studies. At the end of the visit, the reviewer will be asked to present initial impressions and findings at an exit interview, which will include the dean, faculty from the department, a representative of the Provost, the Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies (and, when a graduate program is under review, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Studies), the Director of Assessment, and the liaison from the Program Planning Committee.

 

The evaluation report should be guided by the question in the first paragraph. The length of the report should be appropriate to the complexity of the plans and the reviewer’s assessment of their contribution to the quality of the program over the next five years. It must, however, include recommendations for change if the reviewer’s evaluation finds that the plan is inadequate in the light of assessment responses or reasons that are explained. If possible, it should also include comparisons with other programs in institutions and communities that are similar to SJSU. The format is left to the reviewer’s discretion. Two possible organizations are as follows: (a) subdivide the report into sections representing curriculum, faculty, students, non-faculty resources, and community interaction, or (b) subdivide the report in the same fashion as the self study.

 

A written report should be submitted to the Office of Undergraduate Studies  within three weeks after the completion of the reviewer’s visit to San José State University. This is necessary if the department is to meet its own deadlines.

 

2. External Reviewer Selection Criteria

 

The Department nominates at least three acceptable candidates for the external reviewer, who meet the following criteria:

 

·         Demonstrated leader in the field (publications or creative works; reputation in instruction; active participation in appropriate scholarly and/or professional activities).

·         Affiliation with accredited academic department or program or professional organization appropriate to program being reviewed.

·         No conflict-of-interest (i.e., no recent graduate of program, recent employee, friend or relative of any member of the program, recent contractual arrangements with program).

·         Familiarity with academic/professional goals of the departments as well as the nature of the program being reviewed (e.g., experience with similar programs, experience with graduates of program being reviewed).

·         Willingness to accept budget constraints (see following guidelines).

 

3. Budget

 

·         Cost of air travel from outside California, not to exceed rates available from a University contracted travel agency.

·         $1,000 honorarium out of which the reviewer is expected to pay all expenses (except for out-of-state airfare).

·         If the program wishes to offer additional funds, it may do so at its own expense.

 

4. Procedures

 

A.     Department submits to the Dean the resumes of the three candidates who are acceptable to the department and able to serve within the required time period as agreed upon.  The Dean recommends the reviewers in rank order and provides all resumes to the AVP Undergraduate Studies.

B.      The Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies or Graduate Studies as appropriate, selects one reviewer from the three submitted candidates and notifies the Department of the selection.

C.     The Department arranges for the date of the review and the site visits in late fall or early spring of the year of scheduled completion date as agreed upon in the negotiated Program Planning Schedule. The Office of Undergraduate Studies engages the reviewer and sends contract and other relevant documents (including the Program Planning Guidelines, Curricular Priorities, and letter of invitation) to the reviewer. The Department then arranges the schedule of the visit, including the entrance and exit interviews, in consultation with the College, the Program Planning Committee liaison, the Office of Undergraduate Studies, and Graduate Studies & Research.

D.     The Department sends the Program Plan to the reviewer one month prior to the visit.

E.      At the time of the visit, the Office of Undergraduate Studies and Academic Resources transfers funds to the College. The Department arranges for all payments of honorarium and airfare.

F.      The reviewer must submit a final report to the Office of Undergraduate Studies  within three weeks of the visit.

 

5. Schedule

 

A.     Time: One and a half days to two days for site visit.

 

B.      Contact People:

·         Department faculty, staff, students, and Department Chair

·         College Deans and Associate Deans

·         Associate Vice Presidents Academic Affairs

·         Provost

·         Program Planning Committee Liaison

·         Alumni

 

C.     Required Meetings:

·         Initial interview with the Dean, AVP for Undergraduate Studies and, when appropriate, the AVP of Graduate Studies and Research on the first day.

·         Exit meeting for Reviewer to present initial impressions, to which all interested persons are invited. The following people will be invited to the Exit meeting: representative of the Provost; AVP for Undergraduate Studies, and where appropriate, the AVP for Graduate Studies & Research; college dean; department chair and faculty; PPC liaison; University Director of Assessment; students majoring in program under review; and other relevant constituencies.


Appendix 6: Department Program Planning Checklist

 

(This form is optional. It is provided so that the departments can easily keep track of the progress of their program planning as it goes through the various steps of the process.)

 

Degree BA      BS      MA      MS      Other  ____________

 

Program         ______________________________________________________

 

 

Negotiated schedule completed, signed, & sent to UGS                       ____

 

Justification for more than 120 units approved                                   ____

 

Submit list of proposed external reviewers to Dean                             ____

 

Submit two hardcopies and electronic copy of Self Study to UGS          ____

         

Confirm reviewer(s) willingness to serve                                           ____

 

Send approved Self Study to external reviewer(s)                              ____

 

Make schedule in conjunction with appropriate people for Site Visit       ____

 

Initial and Exit interviews scheduled with appropriate people                ____

 

Initial interview held with external reviewer(s)                                   ____

 

Exit meeting held with external reviewer(s)                              ____

 

External reviewer(s) report received by UGS                                      ____

 

External reviewer(s) report distributed to Department, College              ____

 

Departmental response sent to College Committee and UGS                 ____

 

College Committee report completed                                                ____

 

Dean endorsement of College Committee report completed                   ____

 

PPC Report completed                                                                   ____

 

Meeting of Provost, Dean, Chair and faculty                                      ____  

               

 

 

 



[1] These guidelines do not modify current Academic Senate policies. Those policies include S94-2, “Organization of the Program Planning Process at SJSU,” as amended by S96-10, “Program Planning Process” and F03-4, “Coordination of External Accreditation with Program Planning.” Current Program Planning Guidelines can be found at:  http://www.sjsu.edu/ugs/programplanning/guidelines/

 

 

[2] The SJSU mission is found at http://www.sjsu.edu/about_sjsu/mission/