Unit Academic Program Review

The ECU Academic Program Review Procedures are and must remain consistent with The Code and UNC Policy Manual 400.1 Policy on Academic Program Planning (specifically, Section V. Review and Evaluation of Existing Academic Programs), The Code and UNC Policy Manual 400.1.1[R] Regulation for Academic Program Planning and Evaluation, ECU University Policy Manual REG02.07.05 Unit Academic Program Review, and ECU Faculty Manual, Part VI, Section VII. Curriculum Procedures and Academic Program Development. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms of this policy, the Faculty Manual or The Code and theUNC Policy Manual, the provisions of The Code and UNC Policy Manual shall control.

1. Executive Summary

As an essential component of East Carolina University’s institutional effectiveness process, the primary goal of Academic Program Review (APR) is to improve and maintain the quality and rigor of both undergraduate and graduate education at East Carolina University (ECU). Program review offers a way of achieving that goal by acknowledging strengths, identifying areas of growth, and providing guidance to improve individual programs. Ongoing student learning outcomes assessment informs APR and supports institutional effectiveness and institutional accreditation. 

UNC System Policy 400.1, Policy on Academic Program Planning establishes a minimum seven-year review cycle and faculty’s role in shared governance regarding the development and review of the curriculum. APR is a form of program evaluation supported by the Division of Academic Affairs.

The review process is comprised of five major components:

• 1. Self-Study prepared by unit
• 2. Review, report, and recommendations by an External Review Committee (ERC)
• 3. Program Response Report developed by the unit and reviewed by college leadership and an Educational Policies and Planning Committee (EPPC) representative
• 4. Approval of the Program Response Report by EPPC and Faculty Senate
• 5. Progress Report submitted three years after the approval of the Program Response Report

All undergraduate and graduate programs are subject to the seven-year review process, although it is recognized that some programs at ECU hold specialized program or college specific accreditation separate from University-wide accreditation. In these instances, the specialized accreditation review process, in addition to an evaluation of the six components listed below, will substitute for the ECU APR process. In lieu of a full self-study report, specialized accredited programs will submit a supplemental report covering items a to f below, which is due within one year after the program’s onsite visit or affirmation of accreditation. Permission must be requested from the UNC System President by the Chancellor if a specialized accreditation cycle is longer than seven years.

All academic programs shall evaluate:

• a. Current and projected student demand, as measured by enrollments in the majors and degrees produced;
• b. Current and projected workforce demand, as measured by projected job growth and existing data on student employment outcomes;
• c. Student outcomes, including persistence, graduation, time to degree, and, when possible, post-graduation success;
• d. Program costs and productivity, including research, scholarship, and creative activity and student credit hours produced compared to the number and cost of faculty and staff;
• e. The contribution of the program to professions that are critical to the health, educational attainment, and quality of life of North Carolinians; and
• f. Any other considerations identified by the chancellor or by the President.

2. Primary Responsibility for ECU APR Process:

All reviews of non-specialized accredited programs will be conducted under the direction of the Division of Academic Affairs, managed by Institutional Planning, Assessment and Research (IPAR) and in cooperation with unit faculty and college dean. All programs in a department or school will be reviewed simultaneously.  The roles of each participating unit are described below:

• 2.1. The Director of Institutional Assessment (DIA) will function as the coordinator for the review process and will oversee all aspects of the review process.
• 2.2. The APR project manager will facilitate the review process by working with administrators, faculty, and staff.
• 2.2. IPAR will provide standard data resources. Some additional data may be provided by the dean’s office, unit administrator/faculty, or existing external data sources.
• 2.3. Program faculty will participate in the planning of the review, including providing a list of potential reviewers and participants who will meet with the ERC.
• 2.4. The ERC will include one internal reviewer and two external reviewers. The membership of the ERC will be dependent upon the levels (undergraduate and/or graduate), size, and complexity of the programs. The membership of the ERC will be decided jointly by the Internal Review Committee (IRC) comprised of the college dean, graduate school dean (if graduate programs are included in the review), the DIA, and an EPPC representative.
• 2.5. The Division of Academic Affairs, within a budget and under such expenditure rules as are established in advance of the review, will provide funds for expenses and stipends.
• 2.6. All academic programs will be reviewed on a predetermined, staggered seven-year cycle, except when extenuating circumstances necessitate a change in the schedule.  A seven-year program review schedule, which is approved by the provost, is posted on the IPAR website.

3. Academic Program Review Self-Study Components for ECU APR Process:

• 3.1 Program self-studies must address the following areas:
  • 3.1.1 Program Purpose
  • 3.1.2 Enrollment, Degrees, and Student Success
  • 3.1.3 Curriculum, Learning Outcomes and Student Satisfaction
  • 3.1.4 Strength of Faculty (including faculty bio-sketches): Teaching, Research and Scholarship
    • 3.1.4.1 Program faculty’s contribution to the General Education Program or other academic programs outside of the department/school housing the programs under review should be included here.
  • 3.1.5 Regional Transformation: Economic Development and Public Service
  • 3.1.6 Resources
  • 3.1.7 Other Operational or Programmatic Outcomes

As stated in UNC Policy 400.1, based on the results of an APR, the Chancellor or designee can take action to expand, contract, or eliminate an academic program. The Program Response and Program Progress Reports will serve as evaluation markers to determine progress on ERC recommendations and to inform any actions determined by the Chancellor. If the Chancellor decides to contract or eliminate an academic program, the faculty will have at least fourteen (14) calendar days and up to sixty (60) calendar days, not to include the summer session, to respond to the Chancellor’s decision.

IPAR prepares summary reports for all academic programs reviewed in an academic year, submits those summary reports to the Board of Trustees for review, and then submits them to the University of North Carolina System President as required by UNC Policy 400.1.

This policy should be reviewed every 7-10 years.