1 / 16

Program Cancellation: Doing it Right

This program reviews and evaluates post-secondary programs using key performance indicators, aiming for measurable improvement and identifying programs for suspension or development. The case study explores a program identified as Tier Two and recommends its suspension, along with a phase-out plan for current students and the development of a new program. The faculty response includes short, medium, and long-term recommendations for program delivery, mix, and costs. The conclusion emphasizes the ongoing need for proactive program viability assessment.

joycevaughn
Download Presentation

Program Cancellation: Doing it Right

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Program Cancellation: Doing it Right

  2. Doing it Right • 1999 Program review and program costing • LASA Case Study • 2002 Program Viability

  3. Program Review and Evaluation • Policy # 2-207 • Two – tiered annual review • Using KPI data, indicators weighted • All post-secondary programs • Data compiled to arrive at overall program score • College average calculated

  4. Tier One Review • Identifies single indicators in bottom 20% of the college • Report generated by coordinator • Interpretation of results • Measurable improvement targets • Action plan to meet target

  5. Tier Two Review • Identifies programs in bottom 20% overall • Requires a self study report addressing quantitative and qualitative information • cost/revenue analysis • Advisory committee support • partnerships • Curriculum quality • Leading edge, unique program

  6. Program Review Committee • Membership includes VPA, program coordinator, faculty, student rep., ATL • Committee makes recommendations • Modify • New program development • Suspend

  7. Presented to college administration for review • Board of Governors for approval in the case of program suspension

  8. LASA Case Study • Program identified as Tier Two -Low graduation rate -Low related employment rate -Low student satisfaction -Low graduate satisfaction

  9. Other information • Historical perspective • Student morale • Financial picture

  10. Recommendations • Suspension • Program phase-out plan (focused on current LASA students) • New program development

  11. Faculty response

  12. Why ??? • Part of the decision making process • It made sense • Viewed as an opportunity for new program development • leading

  13. 2002 • Task teams led by ATLs to address budget gap • Short, medium and long term recommendations • Program delivery • Program mix • Program delivery costs

  14. Program Viability • KPI data – student and grad satisfaction, grad rates, employment rates • Enrolment Info – trends, demand, market share • Program costing - %contribution, $ contribution, capital costs, other funding sources • Curriculum Info – partnerships, exit/entry points, future trends

  15. Conclusions • Programs have a life cycle • Program viability should be assessed on an ongoing proactive basis • Program suspension makes as much sense as program development

  16. It’s not so much that we’re afraid of change or so in love with the old ways, but it’s like that place in between that we fear… it’s like being between trapezes. It’s Linus when his blanket is in the dryer. There’s nothing to hold on to.Marilyn Ferguson

More Related