Why Rigorous, Data-Driven Academic Program Reviews Matter

Dr. Michael Marsden
Interim Vice President of Academic Affairs
The College of St. Scholastica (Duluth, Minnesota)
August 2016 – June 2017

Those of us placed in interim positions as academic leaders have many challenges and opportunities presented to us in quick order and which we must prioritize. Perhaps one of the most important opportunities is to establish the framework for a credible, rigorous academic program review process, or to significantly enhance an existing one.

A data-driven, transparent, and credible academic program review process supports the academic enterprise and academic freedom of the college or university. Not only is such a process required by major accrediting agencies, it is also the way to best serve the host institution long into the future. This brief article outlines some of the key components in a successful academic program review process.

What do we mean by a rigorous, data-driven, academic program review? It is essential at the outset of faculty discussions on this topic to emphasize that the process include qualitative as well as quantitative data. Some of the more obvious quantitative data would include tenured and tenure-track faculty as a percentage of total faculty, sizes of classes, SCHs generated per full-time faculty vs, adjuncts, direct instructional expenditures per SCH and FTE, to name just a few. Having comparative data points from peer institutions is often very helpful. It is essential to include qualitative data as well, such as instances of students doing research with faculty, number of internship opportunities created for students, culminating senior experiences offered, placement data for graduates, again to name just a few.

Such a program review processes must include several key elements. They must have carefully and clearly defined stages and timelines, and the process must be adequately funded because it is an illusion to assume that there are no costs associated with academic program reviews. For example, external evaluators should be utilized for reviews of all major programs, undergraduate and graduate. Every program – minor, major, or certificate should be reviewed at least once every five years. In addition, trigger mechanisms should be put in place when there are major shifts in program data, either upward or downward, between scheduled reviews.

In order to create a culture in which academic program reviews are not only expected but welcomed, the processes have to allow for weaker programs to receive needed direction and support with appropriate accountability and timelines for positive change. Conversely, the processes must also allow demonstrably strong programs to receive appropriate, additional resources to reach their next level of excellence. 

Another key aspect of the credibility of a rigorous academic program review process is transparency throughout the process, and especially at the conclusion of the process. After programs have been given an opportunity to correct any errors of fact in the final reports, these reports should be posted internally for the entire community to review.

In an era where enrollments are increasingly monitored and evaluated for program viability, it is easy to forget that institutional viability resides in the quality of the academic programs we offer.  The goal should be to create an institutional culture in which academic program reviews are welcomed and celebrated as a way of striving to make the institution as strong as possible.

In sum, an interim academic leader can do a great deal in a short amount of time to either strengthen an existing academic program review process or to shape the key components of an academic program review process that will serve the institution well for many years to come. As a final benefit, these efforts can encourage other divisions of the institutions directly impacting our students’ learning to also develop rigorous reviews of the support programs they offer. Striving for quality is not free, but it can become an institutional habit.