mia alexander-snow, phd director, office for planning and institutional effectiveness 2012-2013...
Post on 25-Dec-2015
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
UK’s Program Review Processfor
Administrative Units
Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD
Director, Office for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2
Topics to Cover Institutional Effectiveness & Assessment program review overview UK’s program review schedule & current process administrative units participating in 2011-2012 cycle program review components: self study, external
review, and implementation plan role of Planning, Assessment, and Institutional
Research sources that inform review 2011-2012 program review calendar contacts questions
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 3
What is Institutional Effectiveness?
“The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission” (SACS Core Requirement 2.5).
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 4
What is Assessment?Assessment is the process by which …
“the institution identifies expected outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; assesses whether it achieves these outcomes; and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results” (SACS Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1).
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 5
What is Assessment at UK?
“Assessment is used to monitor the University’s effectiveness in achieving its mission, vision, and goals. The University and its units shall demonstrate an explicit use of assessment results to facilitate resource allocation and budgeting decisions in support of their strategic plans and to ensure quality enhancement” (UK AR 1:4)
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
What assessment activities monitor UK’s Institutional Effectiveness efforts?
Strategic Planning
• Identifies and prioritizes the actions the University and its units can take to help it best accomplish the University’s goals and fulfill its mission (AR 1:4)
6
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 7
What assessment activities monitor UK’s Institutional Effectiveness efforts?
Annual Progress Reporting
Dynamic process for reviewing, updating and revising strategic planning efforts over a 3-5 year period
Answers the following questions in a systematic and thorough way :“How are we doing? ---Actual Results“What things are working? ---Reflection and Analysis“What needs to happen next?” ---Improvement Action
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
What assessment activities monitor UK’s Institutional Effectiveness efforts?
6 yr Periodic Program Review : the primary vehicle for assessment of educational and administrative units and for documentation of institutional effectiveness (AR 1:4).
• 424 Units participate in Program Review• 77 Administrative and Educational Support units• 18 Colleges and Schools• 307 Academic Departments and degree programs• 22 Research Centers
8
9
Program Review Overview
Background: Program Reviews in Kentucky
Governing Regulation IX-I
Administrative Regulations 1:4
required every 5-7 years for all academic and administrative units (exceptions may be negotiated to align with specialized accreditation cycle)
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
10
UK’s Program Review Schedule Schedule & Current Year Progress Updates
Purpose: communicate to organizational entities the full 6-yr review cycle and when
units can expect to undergo program review
Goals: provide the transparent and accurate maintenance of the review schedule
for the university’s educational (academic) and administrative units; and monitoring unit progress
Administrative Units participating in 2011-2012 Cycle President: 2 units Provost: 3 units EVPFA: 3 units
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
11
Program Review Overview, continued
What is the purpose and goal of program review?
to improve the quality and effectiveness of teaching and learning, research, public service, and operations; and
to develop recommendations leading to organizational improvement based on internal evaluation with appropriate input from external experts
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/062012-2013 Program Review Orientation
12
Program Review Overview, continued
Who is responsible for satisfying program review? President, provost and executive vice presidents
deans, vice presidents, associate vice presidents, associate and vice provosts, department chairpersons, directors, and other administrators
Vice President for Institutional Research, Planning, and Effectiveness
unit/area faculty, staff, and/or appropriate personnel
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06 2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
What are the components of UK’s program review process?
13
• Unit/Program Self –Study• (internal Review)
SWOT Analysis
• External Review• within UK• outside UK
Recommendations
• Implementation Plan
Quality Enhancement
Agenda
• Annual Progress Report
Documentation of enhancement
results & Informs Strategic
Planning & Budget
14
Program Review ComponentsI.*Self-Study Report (include as appropriate):
program documents resources input from affected constituents adherence to policies and procedures evaluation of quality and productivity analysis of strengths and recommendations for quality
enhancement Elements evaluated:
centrality competitive /comparative advantage cost effectiveness demand quality distinctiveness
*Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/062012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
What are the components of UK’s program review process?
15
• Unit/Program Self –Study• (internal Review)
SWOT Analysis
• External Review• within UK• outside UK
Recommendations
• Implementation Plan
Quality Enhancement
Agenda
• Annual Progress Report
Documentation of enhancement
results & Informs Strategic
Planning & Budget
16
Program Review Components, continued
II.i. External Review (completed by External Review Committee)examine the self-study report;use appropriate data collection techniques to
assure objectivity;assess validity of conclusions reached in self-
study; identify additional strengths and
recommendations for quality enhancement; andprepare a final report—report made available to
faculty, staff employees, and students
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
Slide Reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
17
Program Review Components, continuedII.ii. Administrative External Review Committee
appointed and charged by administrator to whom the unit head reports
consists of 4-5 members—stakeholders and constituencies affected by the unit program and services
4-5 faculty and staff employees, or students from outside the unit 1-2 ex-officio members, appointed to support external review committee
following external review, meets with unit and its leadership to discuss preliminary findings and writes report
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
18
Program Review Components, continued
II.iii. External Review Committee Report considers the unit’s…
Program documents: strategic plan (i.e. mission statement, goals, and objectives, & criteria for measuring progress); primary contributions to UK’s mission and vision, organizational chart or structure, & annual progress reports
Resources: adequacy of budget, facilities, equipment, personnel, including faculty and staff numbers demographics, and support from other university units essential to effective operations (e.g., research, engagement, development, alumni affairs, human resources, facilities management, financial units, & information technology)
Input from Affected Constituents: evaluation data from faculty, staff, and students affected by the delivery of program and services to the unit.
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
19
Program Review Components, continued
II.iii. External Review Committee Report considers the unit’s…
Adherence to Policies and Procedures: evidence of adherence to university policies and procedures (e.g., registration, student activity fees, hiring practices, etc.)
Evaluation of Quality and Productivity: evidence of quality of the collegial culture and climate Faculty and staff employees, communications and interactions; Orientation, advising, and other student services programs; Learning outcomes; Customer or client satisfaction; Business and operating procedures;
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06 2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 20
Accreditation and the External Review ProcessFully Accredited Programs/Units: Accreditation
Self-Study, Accreditation Review and Accreditation Report May Substitute for:
UK’s self-study UK’s External Review, and UK’s External Review Committee Report
Will NOT Substitute for: Program Review Implementation Plan
Partially Accredited Programs/Units: Accreditation Review and Accreditation Report May ONLY Substitute for:
External Reviewer (s) for the UK External Review
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
What are the components of UK’s program review process?
21
• Unit/Program Self –Study• (internal Review)
SWOT Analysis
• External Review• within UK• outside UK
Recommendations
• Implementation Plan
Quality Enhancement
Agenda
• Annual Progress Report
Documentation of enhancement
results & Informs Strategic
Planning & Budget
22
Program Review Components, continuedIII. Implementation Plan
Sets agenda for change and quality enhancement over the next 5-7 year cycle;
unit faculty, staff, and/or students under the leadership of unit head define unit agenda based on self-study and external review report/recommendations;
must be approved by unit head’s supervisor;
used by unit to document future plans and resource needs for consideration in budgetary decision-making; and
supports annual progress reporting
Slide reference citation: University of Kentucky Administrative Regulations (AR)1:4:11/15/06
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
23
Sources that inform Review unit website peer benchmarking and “best practices” last unit self-study reports (2005-06, or 2006-07) annual progress reports (past 3 years) most recent accreditation or certification results and
recommendations formative and summative assessments
qualitative– focus groups, interviews, etc. quantitative—satisfaction surveys, employer surveys, etc.
Institutional data (provided by Office of Institutional Research) for examples see: http://www.uky.edu/IRPE/ir.html
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 24
Institutional Data Sources Institutional data compiled by the UK Office of
Institutional Research can be found at:
www.uky.edu/IRPE/ir.html
www.uky.edu/IRPE/ie/supportdata.htmlwww.uky.edu/IRPE/colleges.html
25
Program Review Calendar
*Calendar
Purpose: communicates steps and timeline for completing
program review; and ensures timely completion
*Refer to administrative calendar for 2012-2013
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
26
Additional Program Review Questions
General Program Review Process Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD
Director, Planning and Institutional EffectivenessEmail: mia.alexander-snow@uky.eduOffice phone: 257-2873
6-Year Schedule Connie Vaughn
Program Planning CoordinatorEmail: csvaug1@email.uky.eduOffice phone: 257-7915
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation
2012-2013 Program Review Orientation 27
Presentation Contact InformationMia Alexander-SnowOffice for Planning & Institutional
Effectiveness Website: http://www.uky.edu/IRPE/ie.html
Roger SugarmanOffice of Institutional ResearchWebsite:
http://www.uky.edu/IRPE/welcome.html
top related