Abbreviated Program Review
Process for Programs with Specialized/Disciplinary Accreditation
Context for Abbreviated Program Review
In the decade since CPP’s former academic Program Review Guide (AS-2350-910/AP) was adopted in 2010, higher education has devoted considerable thought to the goals and purposes of academic program review. The general consensus of this work is that the review should engage faculty in a collaborative process of evidence-informed reflection that directly leads to specific action plans for improvement of all aspects of the program. CPP’s updated Program Review Policy (AS-2904-201-AP) was adopted in 2020 to reflect such best practices in higher education.
Abbreviated program review for accredited programs is necessary for a few reasons.
- It would be duplicative and redundant for accredited programs to undergo a full program review after completing the specialized/disciplinary accreditation process. However, there are aspects of program review that are CSU- and/or institution-specific, and the abbreviated program review will focus on those issues, e.g., GI2025, inclusive polytechnic identity, etc.
- Updated WSCUC standards require that all degree programs undergo periodic review, which will include analysis of student achievement of the program’s learning outcomes (CFR 2.4).
- Finally, abbreviated program review for accredited programs is included in the Cal Poly Pomona Policy on Program Review that was adopted by the Academic Senate in 2020 (link (PDF)) to ensure that programs with specialized/disciplinary accreditation are afforded the same benefits as non-accredited programs.
Completing the abbreviated program review process will provide accredited programs with the same benefits that non-accredited programs receive when completing a full program review.
- Program review documentation filed with Academic Senate and Chancellor’s Office notified of completed program review (handled by the Office of Assessment and Program Review)
- Response/action plan is developed, with an action plan response from the college dean.
- Meeting with CPP’s provost and dean during which a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is developed to support the program.
Process and Roles:
Rationale: Provide program context for what will be requested as part of the accreditation process; allows for increased efficiency and minimizes duplication of efforts
OAPR |
|
OAPR/ FF |
|
Rationale: Allow program to focus on accreditation process; program will be engaged with accreditation body and external process with limited bandwidth for internal program review process
Program |
|
OAPR/FF |
|
Rationale: Provide program with the smae benefits as non-accredited program in completing program review process that results in MOU with the provost.
Program |
|
OAPR/FF |
|
PRC |
|
OAPR/FF |
|
Program |
|
Dean |
|
OAPR |
|
OAPR: Office of Assessment and Program Review FF: Faculty Fellow for Program Review PRC: Program Review Committee