Institutional Planning

• Program Review Overview
• Process
• Self Study
• Schedule
• Faculty Committee

Program Review Overview

Academic program reviews were initiated in 1995 and serve as the primary mechanism used to evaluate and continually improve academic programs at Cornell. The evaluations made by program reviews are oriented within the context both of disciplinary norms and unit, collegiate and university missions. External review teams identify program strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities, and offer specific recommendations to assist programs in their efforts to improve.

Every department or academic program undergoes the academic program review process every five to ten years. The Faculty Committee on Program Review, a university-wide professorial faculty committee, oversees the program review process.

The college dean is responsible for the unit reviews with support provided by the provost, if requested.  A departmental review consists of two phases: a self study by the department faculty and an evaluation by an ad-hoc evaluation committee.  Additionally, the department finds appropriate mechanisms to involve a broad spectrum of students in the process.

• The Self Study
• External Review Team
• The Faculty Committee on Program Review

The Self Study

The self study will address specific issues raised by the dean, the department under review, and the University administration and will include:

• A description of the fundamental questions that organize and motivate the current teaching, research, outreach and other scholarly activities of the department, showing how the faculty share intellectual discourse and purpose;
• A critical analysis of the current state of the work of the department, including graduate and undergraduate teaching (with attention to the purpose and coherence of the curricula), research, and outreach, with whatever quantitative information required by the dean;
• Specific issues, if any, the department wishes the ad-hoc evaluation committee to address and any other expectations the department has of the evaluation committee;
• A plan for the next five to ten years, including staffing and resource allocation, and its relationship to the fiscal guidelines supplied by the dean.

The self study need not be a long or time-consuming process.  Thorough and comprehensive annual reviews should provide the necessary background and framework for the study.

Additional university-wide review criteria and required information may be specified by the Faculty Committee on Program Review.  Examples of possible criteria are given in Appendix A.  Every effort will be made to ensure that the University's administrative systems will provide the required quantitative data automatically.  When the self study is complete the department will forward a copy to the dean and 4 copies to the FCPR.

top

External Review Team

The ad-hoc evaluation committee will consist of at least three specialists in the field from outside Cornell.  The dean will form the committee after consultation with the faculty of the department under review.  The committee will be asked to evaluate the department's principal activities, to compare it with leading departments in other universities, to assess its trajectory, and to recommend whatever changes the committee believes are appropriate, under the assumption of constant resources.

top

The Faculty Committee on Program Review

The Faculty Committee on Program Review (FCPR), a university-wide professorial faculty committee, will oversee the program review process.  The committee will consist of ten faculty members representing the broad disciplinary areas and academic functions of Cornell and the vice provost, ex-officio.  Members of the FCPR will be selected jointly by the provost and the Faculty Senate, and will serve three-year staggered terms.  The provost and Senate will choose the chair of the committee jointly.  Function of the Committee will include:

1. Determining (after consultation with appropriate deans) the cycle for reviews of departments, fields, and centers to facilitate the area reviews;
2. Monitoring the quality of the review process by:

b.  Receiving and reviewing the department's self study and any comments on the plan for review, reviewing and approving the dean's (or other administrator's) detailed plan for each review, including the ad-hoc evaluation committee's composition and charge,

c.  Establishing and maintaining minimum criteria for reviews to ensure the regular collection of uniform data from the entire University,

c.  Receiving copies of the individual program reviews, including the self study, the ad-hoc evaluation committee, a response by the department being reviewed, and a response by the dean, which states the action to be taken as a result of the review,

d.  Receiving an annual report from the provost giving the results of the area reviews completed or in progress,

 

3.  Commissioning reviews of selected centers, fields, and cross-departmental groupings to be carried out by the dean of the Graduate School, the vice provost, or a college dean.

Departments or other units being reviewed may approach the FCPR directly at any time.

top