University of Idaho Successful External Program Review

1. University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director

2. INTRODUCTION • Overview of EPR • Purpose of EPR • Participants and Responsibilities • Timeline • Standards and procedures • Upcoming changes

3. OVERVIEW • Mandated in 1994 by NWCCU (NASC) • Developed by University-level committee • Aimed at building quality not financial enhancement • Both academic and service/support units • Seven year cycle • Can be integrated with specialized accreditation • One-year follow-up provides continuity

4. Purposes of EPR • Enable UI to effectively meet the goals implied by our role and mission • Improve UI’s ability to respond to student demand and to regional and state education and economic needs • Insure integration of key performance indicators, program improvement, and ongoing assessment efforts with strategic planning

5. Purposes continued: • Provide a sound foundation for internal planning and budgeting decisions within units • Broaden the knowledge base for establishing priorities, strategies, and budgets • Make cost-effective use of state resources as we fulfill our mission • Assist the institution in making sound decisions regarding allocation and reallocation of funds

6. Participants and Responsibilities • Program personnel and faculty • Administration including department chair or director, dean or vice president, provost and president • External Review Team members • Institutional Research and Assessment • External Program Review Committee • Unit titles and roles will vary among institutions

7. Participants and Responsibilities • Program personnel and faculty: • Develop the self-study • Participate in nominating persons for the review team • Active participation in the review team’s site visit • Collegial discussion of and response to the reviewer comments and evaluation • Participation in subsequent quality improvement activities • Complete a one-year follow-up report

8. Participants and Responsibilities • Administration • Department Chair or Director • Provides primary leadership for unit process • Works with Dean and administration to meet goals of the process • Handles routine matters related to the review including scheduling and travel arrangements • Provides feedback to Dean and Provost along with evaluator’s report • Dean or Vice President • Works with Department Chair or Director to articulate goals of the process • Provides feedback to department chair and Provost • Examines program focus and possible changes

9. Participants and Responsibilities • President and/or Provost • Meets with all review committees • Review all self-study and evaluator reports, providing appropriate feedback • May reallocate resources as appropriate and recommended by Dean and Department Chair

10. Participants and Responsibilities • External Review Team Members • Assess and report their judgment on: • Program quality according to the criteria provided • Alignment of the program goals with departmental, college and university role and mission • The projected value or feasibility of various planning alternatives and priorities set forth by the department • Recommendations to assist the unit toward continual improvement

11. Participants and Responsibilities • External Review Team Members • Prepare the Review Team Report reflecting: • The quality of the unit self-study • Program strengths and weaknesses relative to the criteria and questions provided • The centrality of the program to the UI role, mission and goals • The validity of the self-study’s identification of demand and need for the program • Evaluation of the various program improvement alternatives proposed by the unit in the context of available and projected resource levels

12. Participants and Responsibilities • Institutional Research and Assessment • Facilitates the campus-wide process • Maintains the schedule and the archives • Provides units with an overview of the process • Provides guidance regarding process • Provides data, standard measures and additional as requested • Assists in site visits as requested • Provides $2500 funding for travel, hosting and perhaps honoria

13. Participants and Responsibilities • External Program Review Committee • Develops policy, standards and guidelines • Monitors the campus-wide process • Reviews draft self-study reports and provides feedback as requested

14. Timelines: Seven Year Cycle

15. Timelines

16. EPR Standards and Procedures • Academic Standards include: • Mission and vision • Teaching/Undergraduate Education • Core/Service Obligation • Graduate Education Research • Outreach • Enrollment • Assessment • Personnel • Facilities and Equipment • Finances • Innovation and Distinction

17. EPR Standards and Procedures • Service/Support Standards include: • Mission and vision • Teaching/Undergraduate Education • Graduate Education Research • Outreach • Personnel • Facilities and Equipment • Finances • Advancement • Innovation and Distinction

18. EPR Standards and Procedures • Proposed timeline • Selection of the review team • Contact selected reviewers • Collect data and prepare the self-study • Schedule the site visit • Distribute the self-study • The site visit • The exit interview • Responding to the report • The follow-up

19. EPR Standards and Procedures

20. EPR Standards and Procedures

21. Upcoming Changes • Expanding EPR Committee • Develop review committee for self-studies • Beef up assessment component • Add assessment to service/support units • Develop formal communication with Provost to address requested schedule changes

22. Upcoming Changes • Refine the standards to include more: • Discussion of unit vision - standards should reflect a more forward looking process • Information on how unit planning is done • Discussion of new initiatives • Comparative metrics (standard data items) • Discussion of relationships with other campus units

23. www.webs.uidaho.edu/ipb/External-Prog-Review.htm