Review Process

Programs will be reviewed on an eight-year cycle. Units will complete the process in the equivalent of one semester, allowing for two rounds of reviews per academic year.

  • Timeline

    May (or November): Departments who will be reviewed will be notified, given performance indicators, asked to submit list of issues and list of potential external reviewers by end of summer or by the end of the calendar year. Provost Office representatives meet with units to answer questions/orientation.
    September: Appointment of Review Council
    August (or December): Finalize external reviewers for the current year reviews
    October (or March): Departments submit a Self-Study Report
    November (or April): External reviewers visit, and within 14 days of visit written reports are submitted by external reviewers. Both the College and the Provost’s Office will receive the report.
    December (or May): Implementation meetings with Deans/Unit Heads/central administration occur to develop implementation agreement.
    Following Spring: Units provide written report of progress to date for College Annual Review.
  • Budget for Reviews

    The Provost’s Office supports program review at $2,000 per reviewer, plus $400 of the External Review Committee Chair. This support is outlined below:

    • Travel and Review Expenses: the Provost’s Office will transfer $1,000 per reviewer (up to five reviewers) to the unit being reviewed to cover the costs associated with travel and review expenses (such as copies and meals). The transfer will occur at the end of the visit, and it will eliminate the need to submit itemized reimbursement forms to the Provost’s Office.
    • Honoraria: the Provost’s Office will continue to process honoraria ($1,000 per reviewer) for up to five external reviewers, as well as $400 for the Chair of the External Review Committee.
  • Key Performance Indicators

    A list of common data to be used for each review will be provided by Division of Management Information (DMI) including the following with benchmark data where possible. Units being reviewed may access this data here. To login, enter your username as UOFI\netid and password. If you have any questions about this information, please contact Staci Provezis. The common data set is a combination of information from DMI Campus Profile, the budget office, and Academic Analytics.  An outline of what is provided is listed below.

    Program At-a-Glance: An overview of the complete data set with key elements pulled out for a quick review of information.
    Financial Resources Overview: This section has data on the department’s financial status.
    Demographics: This section has demographic information for faculty, staff and students. The headcounts are broken down by percentages of women and underrepresented groups for faculty and staff. For students percentages of women and underrepresented are listed as well as non-resident and international.
    Student Background & Experience: In this section, students ACT and high school rank is included.  The section also provides data on degrees granted and mean terms to degree.
    Education and Teaching: In this section, students ACT and high school rank is included.  The section also provides data on degrees granted and mean terms to degree.
    Research: Academic Analytics is shown in this section as well as information about grants, including faculty research grant amounts.

  • Self-study Framework

    This self-study should respond to the questions in the template in a succinct way, so as to create a reflective report that is ten to twelve pages long. The self-assessment reports on four areas: the overall goals, trends, and challenges for the department; the academic/student experience for major or graduate students in the department; the research vitality of the department; and the human, physical and financial resources of the department. In addition to the self-study, departments are asked to respond to a short questionnaire. A copy of the questionnaire is listed below, but the department will be sent a link to an electronic survey.

    Self-study template
    Short questionnaire

  • Annual Report

    To not overburden the units, this process will occur in tandem with the Annual Reports.  These College-level reports will identify units to be reviewed for the following year and will report on progress after past reviews.  These sections of the Annual Reports will be shared with the Review Council.

  • External Review Guidelines

    The external review is a crucial element of the program review that allows for the external reviewers to provide feedback to the unit about what the unit is doing effectively and to identify areas for improvement. The external reviewers should use this report template.

    Reviewer Selection: The names of several external reviewer nominees will be sent to the College from the department. The nominees should be of the stature who can review the unique aspects of the department and who are notable experts in the field. The College will verify the fit of the external reviewers, examine the reviewers’ backgrounds to assure objectivity, and submit the names to the Provost’s office by August  1st or December  1st depending on which semester review takes place. The names should be submitted using this template. These reviewers will be sent a formal invitation to participate by the Provost office. This contact will include expectations of the review, the timeline, and the stipend.
    Reviewer Information: Shortly after the self-studies are completed (by October or March). The reviewers will receive the following information: the self-study document, the questionnaire responses, and the program review common data.
    Reviewer Visit: The units along with the Colleges are responsible for setting the agenda for the review. The review visits will be about two days long, and the reviewers should have the opportunity to meet with the Dean of the College, the Provost, Graduate and Undergraduate students, as well as faculty and staff within the unit. See this sample agenda.
    Reviewer Report: Time should be allotted for the reviewers to meet and to draft a preliminary report that identifies suggestions for improvement. At the end of the visit, the reviewers should have time to orally share their report with the Provost’s office and Dean in an exit interview. The final report is due in 14 days. The Dean and faculty have an opportunity to respond to the report.