Policy 2550: Academic program review

Download Policy 2550: Academic program review

This PDF is the official text of this policy. If there are any incongruities between the text of the HTML version (rightbelow) and the text within the PDF file, the PDF will be considered accurate and overriding.

University Policy #2550

Section 1. Purpose 

This policy sets the standard for planning and conducting academic program reviews, creating action plans based on those reviews, and reporting progress against the respective action plans at Metropolitan State University.

The purpose of an Academic Program Review is to facilitate a high quality and meaningful learning experience for our students by evaluating program relevance, effectiveness and alignment with Metropolitan State University’s mission and strategic goals.

Systematic and comprehensive program reviews will provide evidence to support:

  • Planning and decision making at all levels
  • Continuous improvement
  • Programmatic innovation
  • Stewardship of institutional resources

The program review provides input into a Program Action Plan that identifies goals, actions and needed resources.  Continuous Improvement Reports describe progress against the Program Action Plans.

Section 2. Authority 

This policy is issued pursuant to authority granted under the Rules and Regulations of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU) system.

Section 3. Effective Date 

This policy shall become effective upon signature by the president and shall remain in effect until modified or expressly revoked.

Section 4. Responsibility 

Responsibility for implementation of this policy is assigned to the Provost.

Section 5. Procedure

Academic Procedure 255, Academic Program Review Process, implements this policy. Procedure 255 provides guidance for facilitating, planning, and evaluating academic program reviews.

Section 6. Policy

Metropolitan State University shall delineate a procedure for planning and conducting Academic Program Reviews, creating Program Action Plans and reporting progress with Continuous Improvement Reports.  Such a process shall include, but is not limited to, the review format, documentation requirements, and approvals as evidenced by authorizing signatures by the (1) Department Chair, (2) Dean, and (3) Provost.

Section 7. Review 

This policy will be reviewed every three years or as needed.

Section 8. Signatures 

Issued on this day of  

 

                                                                      

Carol Bormann Young, Interim Executive Vice President and Provost

 

 

Virginia Arthur, President