Anya Sebastien, Director of Academic Programs Van Davis, Special Projects Director

1. The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Proposal Review Process and Distance Education Policies Anya Sebastien, Director of Academic Programs Van Davis, Special Projects Director Academic Affairs and Research Division February 2, 2011

2. Doctoral Proposal Process • Proposal submitted by System Office • Posted on THECB’s website for 30 days • Staff reviews and conducts analysis • Proposal is routed to two staff peer reviewers

3. Doctoral Proposal Process (Continued) • Routed through the Academic Affairs and Research Division • Assistant Commissioner makes a recommendation • Routed through the Commissioner’s Office • Commissioner makes final recommendation to continue with an external reviewer for a site visit or desk review

4. Doctoral Proposal Review • Guidelines for Institutions Submitting Proposals for New Doctoral Programs http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/doctoral request form

5. Program Information Job Market Need • Demonstrate the workforce need for additional graduates in the field. • Show a supply/demand analysis by citing figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Texas Workforce Commission, and professional associations. • Indicate how the number of new graduates produced each year compares to the number of job openings that require a doctoral degree in the discipline on both the national and state levels.

6. Program Information (Continued) • Determine whether there is capacity to accept additional students in existing state and regional programs as well as major programs at peer institutions across the nation. Provide the number of graduates from these programs in the last five years. • Indicate why the proposed program would not unnecessarily duplicate existing programs. Include reasons such as the availability of similar programs, the capacity of existing programs, and/or unique approach or emphasis of the proposed program.

7. Doctoral Proposal Sample Response Job Market Need • “Local and Regional Need- The study of ecology and evolution is essential in ensuring the survival of humans on our planet. Knowledge of these two fields can enhance the quality of our lives by helping to use resources sustainably, without destroying ecosystems. This is especially important in an arid border region, where the rugged landscapes are inhabited by fragile communities and long-term or permanent changes can occur after only a slight human-caused disturbance. Because we know little about the local ecosystems, we are usually unable to stop or reverse the degradation. This proposed program will offer numerous opportunities for international collaborations in research and scholarship.” • “State, national and international needs-The number of doctoral degrees in ecology and related fields increased rapidly over a forty year period from 1960 through the 1990’s (Fig. 2), the number of institutions offering these degrees has not kept pace (Fig. 1).”

8. Doctoral Proposal Sample Response (Continued) • “The National Ecological Observing Network (NEON) (http://www.neonic.org/), a well developed and unprecedented 60 million dollars per year effort to monitor the ecological well being of the nation, will begin over the next few years. Institution is partnering with NEON’s Southwest domain, a critical end point along an environmental gradient that extends from Eastern California to the heart of the Chihuahuan Desert at Indio Mountains Research Station. NEON is likely to dramatically alter the nation’s perceptions on the importance of ecology, which will increase the need for ecologists to take on the most pressing environmental challenges of the nation. “

9. Doctoral Proposal SampleResponse (Continued) • “There are two aspects to the demand for graduate programs in ecology and evolution that need to be addressed. First, while the number of PhD programs has only slightly increased over the past 8 years (Figure 1), the total number of graduates in these fields has significantly increased (Figure 2). The later clearly shows that there is student interest and demand at the academic level. Secondly, opportunities exist in the job market (academic, government, or consulting/private sector) for people with expertise in ecology and evolution.” • “A very good proxy of the current market in evolutionary biology is the website EvoIlDIR (http://evol.mcmaster,ca/evoldir.html). On that site, which archives postings for 3 months, there are almost daily job postings for academic and technical positions.”

10. Doctoral Proposal Sample Response (Continued) • “Additional data is available on the need for ecologists with PhDs from the Ecological Society of America (ESA) a leading professional organization for ecologist. A total of 34 job postings on their website for individuals with a PhD in Ecology. The postings included 17 faculty positions, 11 post-doctoral positions, 4 government jobs and 2 positions with non-governmental organization, Nearly one-half of these jobs were located in Mexico or the US southwest including Texas, Arizona and California. This concentration in the US Southwest of available jobs for PhDs in Ecology stresses the need for locally and regionally trained researchers.”

11. Staff Guidelines for ReviewingProposals for New Doctoral Programs Job Market Need Staff verify submitted documentation to support the need for new doctorates in the discipline of the proposed program both in Texas and the nation. Workforce Projections Staff confirm workforce projections for individuals trained at the doctoral level. Staff review evidence of unmet need, including regional need if applicable, using the following categories: Strong Moderate Weak Comments

12. New Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree Programs • Following Board action on July 30, 2009, new bachelor’s and master’s programs that meet the following criteria are automatically approved (Chapter 5, Subchapter C, Section 5.44): • the program has institutional and governing board approval; • the program complies with the Standards for Bachelor’s and Master’s Programs; • adequate funds are available to cover the costs of the new program;

13. New Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree Programs (Continued) • new costs during the first five years of the program will not exceed $2 million; • the program is a non-engineering program (i.e., not classified under CIP code 14); and • the program will be offered by a university or health-related institution. A new bachelor’s or master’s degree program that meets these criteria may be requested using the Certification Form for New Bachelor’s and Master’s Programs and is automatically approved if no objections are received during the 30-day public comment period. The institution's program inventory will be updated accordingly, and a letter of approval will be sent to the institution/System.

14. New Bachelor’s and Master’s Checklist • Are the SCHs within minimum & maximum for degree level? • CIP Code • Does CIP code match the description of the program? • Comparison with other institutions • Does the CIP code match programs at other institutions? • Do other similarly named programs at other institutions use the same CIP code? • Are any programs within the same 2-digit CIP code at the institution on the low-producing list? • Any comments received during 30-day period?

15. Distance Education Doctoral Proposal Process (New Distance Education Degree) • Proposal submitted by System Office and area notification made if off-campus program • Posted on THECB’s website for 30 days • Staff reviews and conducts analysis • Proposal is routed to Distance Education Advisory Committee’s (DEAC) Doctoral Education Subcommittee • DEAC discusses and votes on recommendation at one of its quarterly meetings • Staff reviews DEAC’s recommendation • Upon a positive review, program is considered by the Board’s Strategic Planning and Policy Committee • Upon a positive review, program is voted on by the Board at one of it’s quarterly meetings

16. Distance Education Doctoral Proposal Process (Change in Distance Education Modality) • Proposal submitted by System Office and area notification made if off-campus program • Posted on THECB’s website for 30 days • Staff reviews and conducts analysis • Proposal is routed to Distance Education Advisory Committee’s (DEAC) Doctoral Education Subcommittee • DEAC discusses and votes on recommendation at one of its quarterly meetings • Staff reviews DEAC’s recommendation • Approval is made at the Assistant Commissioner’s level

17. Distance Education Doctoral Proposal Process (Additional Delivery Site) • Proposal submitted by System Office and area notification made • Posted on THECB’s website for 30 days • Staff reviews and conducts analysis • Proposal is routed to Distance Education Advisory Committee’s (DEAC) Doctoral Education Subcommittee • Staff reviews Subcommittee’s recommendation • Approval is made at the Assistant Commissioner’s level

18. Important Items for Distance Education Doctoral Programs • Program need and demand • Faculty resources • Student interactions • Evaluation of program content and delivery • Student resources and access to campus offices • Institutional distance education infrastructure

19. Online Program and Course Notifications, Bachelor’s and Master’s • Notification made to the Coordinating Board • Notification includes signed Principles of Good Practice • Program is added to Coordinating Board database of distance education programs • No notification is necessary for online courses

20. Off-Campus Program and Course Notifications, Bachelor’s and Master’s • Notification (with copy) made to area institutions within 50 miles of proposed delivery site 60 days prior to beginning of course/program • Area institutions have 30 days to object • Approval is automatic if no objections are received and program is added to Coordinating Board’s distance education database • Signed copy of Principles of Good Practice is submitted to the Coordinating Board for off-campus programs

21. Off-Campus Program and Course Notifications, Bachelor’s and Master’s • Notification (with copy to THECB) made to area institutions within 50 miles of proposed delivery site 60 days prior to beginning of course/program • Area institutions have 30 days to object • Approval is automatic if no objections are received and program is added to Coordinating Board’s distance education database • Signed copy of Principles of Good Practice is submitted to the Coordinating Board for off-campus programs • No area notification is needed for courses that are a part of approved distance education programs • No area notification is needed for programs and courses delivered to MITCs/University Centers but notification to Coordinating Board is necessary for programs

22. Higher Education Regional Councils and Lower Division Courses • Ten Higher Education Regional Councils (HERC) across Texas • Meet every spring • Institutions, including universities, must submit a distance education plan that lists planned off-campus lower-division course offerings • HERC approves the plan at its meeting and forwards to the Coordinating Board • Questions regarding HERCs can be addressed to Dr. David Couch, david.couch@thecb.state.tx.us

23. Self-Supporting (i.e., Non-Formula Funded) Distance Education Programs • Courses are reported on the CBM 00X • Programs follow the normal reporting and notification guidelines • Notification for out-of-country self-supporting degree programs should be made in the form of a letter to the Director of Academic Programs and should certify that the institution has authority to offer the program, that no state funds will be used, and that the out-of-country program will not negatively impact the on-campus program

24. Feel free to contact us. anya.sebastien@thecb.state.tx.us Van.davis@thecb.state.tx.us