A department or program review provides an occasion to review curricular offerings, identify strengths and weaknesses, envision the future shape of the curriculum, articulate goals and aspirations, and consider the implications of intellectual, technological, and pedagogical developments in a discipline. One of the central values of the review process comes from extended, collective reflection which results in a self-study. Respected colleagues in the appropriate field, invited by the Dean for Academic Affairs as a consulting committee of reviewers, also help the department/program review these issues. The reviewers read materials provided by the department/program and meet with faculty, students, and administrators during a two- to three-day campus visit. Typically, reviews of academic departments and programs are conducted approximately every 10 years; the specific timing will be arranged by the Dean for Academic Affairs office, in concert with the department/program.
Once the semester of the review has been determined, the process begins approximately nine months prior to the anticipated campus visit, with the department chair or program director meeting with all members of the department/program to discuss their overall goals for the review, looking at past reviews and thinking about current and future issues. Subsequently, the chair/director and coordinator meet with the Associate Dean to outline the process and specific schedule for the review.
The Associate Dean will ask the department/program to recommend colleagues from other institutions to be considered for the external Review Committee. This list should include individuals who have expertise in relevant fields within the discipline and have demonstrated experience in a distinguished academic setting. Normally, review committees consist of three members and include tenured faculty from liberal arts colleges and larger research universities who have attained some prominence in their discipline and, together, represent a variety of disciplinary orientations and viewpoints. Review Committees are requested to act as consultants to the department/program and the deans, offering critical and empathetic counsel rather than evaluation. The Review Committee is formally appointed by the Dean for Academic Affairs; many details of their campus visit will be arranged by the dean’s office, but the itinerary of meetings will be developed by the department in coordination with the Associate Dean.
Before the Review Committee visit
After the Review Committee visit
1. Review Committee submits report to the Dean (4-6 weeks following).
2. Dean checks report for completeness and shares final report with department and President (normally within two weeks of receiving report).
3. Department/Program meets to discuss the Committee’s report and prepare a written response for the Dean.
4. Department/Program meets with Associate Dean and Dean to discuss Committee report and departmental response (within 6 months of visit).
To prepare for the Review Committee's visit, the chair/director should convene the department or program members to write a statement (usually of 10-20 pages) that will be given to members of the committee before its visit. This narrative should assess the strengths, weaknesses and needs of the department/program and outline a vision for the department/program’s future. It should provide comprehensive background for the Review Committee as well as identify key issues for discussion. Typically, a series of meetings is needed to prepare the narrative and to make the best use of the review process. This can begin with a summer retreat to discuss the important issues in depth, to review historic data on the department/program’s curriculum and teaching and to frame a vision for the department/program that will be included in the Self-Study. A draft of the narrative is shared with Associate Dean, who then submits the complete Self-Study report, including the narrative and supporting materials to the Review Committee in advance of the campus visit. The dean’s office will also provide the Review Committee with College-wide information, e.g., catalogue, viewbook, and campus map.
The narrative report of the Self-Study should summarize the department’s or program’s perspective on all aspects of the department/program and on the historic data collected. It should frame for the Review Committee the questions and issues the department/program is or will be grappling with or would like help in addressing. The narrative should describe and assess the following general topics:
Goals and rationale for the structure of the curriculum, including expectations for majors and minors
Relationships between the major and minor curricula
Teaching areas and strengths of the faculty
Courses that serve broader College needs, including college-wide requirements
Recent innovations or changes in the curriculum and/or teaching methods
How the areas of teaching reflect the state of the discipline and, if appropriate, how that might be unusual in comparison with departments or programs at similar colleges
The range of pedagogy represented in the department or program
How aspects of campus resources are employed, e.g., the Library, technology, and/or Museums
Issues of diversity in student experience and learning styles
Mechanisms within the department/program for providing support for student needs, e.g., tutoring, study groups
· Student Experience
The department’s/program’s goals for its students (majors, minors, and non-majors), e.g., exposure to particular materials, expected competencies
An examination of its effectiveness in meeting those goals
The role of upper level courses, independent studies and honors projects, writing, quantitative reasoning, off-campus study, and other opportunities (e.g., research fellowships, research assistantships, lab assistantships, tutoring or teaching assistantships, etc.)
The role of and expectations for intellectual engagement within the department or program, including independent work with students
Department’s or program’s efforts at supporting the intellectual engagement and professional development of its faculty and instructional staff
Communication and support among faculty, especially for new members, e.g., efforts to mentor junior colleagues, regular departmental meetings
· Cross-campus Initiatives and Programs
Curricular relationships between the department/program and other departments/programs
Potential for further strengthening interdisciplinary relationships
Patterns of double majors
Constraints that may limit the development or effectiveness of such relationships
Events (lectures, speakers, symposia, etc.) that connect the department/program to a broader college audience
· Vision for the Department’s Future
Where the department/program is moving in each of the above areas
Specific and general questions the department/program would like the Review Committee to address
In the course of preparing the Self-Study, chairs/directors will gather information from a variety of sources, all of which should be summarized for the external Review Committee. The Dean’s office, in conjunction with the Office of Institutional Research, will provide a set of historic data for the department/program. Other materials should be available in the department/program, to be collected by the chair/director or coordinator.
The supporting material should include, but is not limited to, the following.
To be supplied by the Dean for Academic Affairs office:
To be supplied by the department or program:
A near-final draft of the narrative and a table of contents for the entire Self-Study should be submitted to the Office of the Dean for Academic Affairs six weeks before the committee's visit. Within the following two weeks, the Associate Dean reviews this with the chair/director, sometimes suggesting revision or clarification. The department will submit nine binders to the Dean's office approximately four weeks before the Committee's visit: eight to include double-sided copies of the final Self-Study including all supporting material except the syllabi; and one to include a double-sided copy of all the syllabi. Syllabi should also be saved electronically in pdf format and sent to email@example.com. These materials will be made available to reviewers by the Dean’s office.
The visit by the external Review Committee typically takes place over a two-day period. The scheduling of times for individual faculty and staff is put together by the dean's office in consultation with the department chair or program director, who shares it with departmental or program colleagues. The schedule will include the following minimum set of opportunities for the committee:
Following the on-campus visit, the Review Committee prepares a written report, usually within four to six weeks. The report is submitted to the Dean for Academic Affairs, who checks the report for completeness and occasionally requests clarification before sharing a copy with the President and the chair/director for distribution to members of the department or program. Normally, the report is provided to the department/program within two weeks of receipt. The department/program will then meet to discuss the report’s findings and begin to formulate plans in response to its recommendations. A written response to the recommendations should be prepared by the department/program and submitted to the Dean. Finally, the report and the written response form the focus of at least one meeting between the Dean, Associate Dean and the faculty of the department/program to discuss the report and its implications for the future. This meeting normally takes place within six months of the campus visit. Departments and the Dean’s office will maintain an archive of these reports that will serve as formal records for College planning. This is an important record that will guide and inform future decisions about the department, its curriculum, and its staffing.