Academic Program Approval and Review Process
(Updated - March 7, 2012)
Murray State University has a variety of programmatic review processes; including initial, continuous, and termed to complement its Strategic Imperatives. The processes are seen as an integral part of the university’s efforts to strive for academic quality, department and collegiate effectiveness, and institutional viability.
Initial review of all academic programs takes place upon inception by a thorough review of each Department and Collegiate Curriculum Committee. Additional reviews above the Collegiate level are conducted by either the respective Undergraduate or Graduate Committee of the University Academic Council, the full Academic Council, and subsequently the Murray State University Board of Regents and the Council on Postsecondary Education.
The university prides itself in continuous academic program review each year as academic departments complete “Triple I Reports”. These goal measuring reports are reviewed and analyzed by the Collegiate Dean, Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, and University President for annualized goal attainment; both for academic quality and institutional priorities related to Strategic Imperatives. In addition, each unit completes an Academic Program Assessment annually, which aids in the measurement of academic effectiveness and viability.
Termed reviews are scheduled for each academic college or school once every 7 years on a rotational basis. A unit/college may be term reviewed on special occasions relating to formal accreditation visits, at the request of the University Provost or President, or at the request of the Academic Council Executive Committee. All reviews are based on a calendar year and conducted by CIP codes.
Termed Academic Review Process
Termed academic reviews are comprehensive program reviews which encompass an extensive review of the Academic College and its dependent Departments/Programs. The termed program review process is scheduled, supervised, and verified by the University Academic Council Executive Committee.
During the process each program/department/collegiate unit is reviewed based on the following guidelines:
1. Department/Program/Collegiate Unit Self Analysis – unit Mission/Vision, a culmination of Triple I Reports, recruitment/retention data, faculty data, faculty and credit hour productivity, certifications, on-going assessment reports, facilities, student graduation survey data, policies and procedures, unit business plans, and other specialized data or requests as outlined by the Executive Committee or Provost/President. Due: November 1.
2. Peer Review Analysis – each Collegiate Dean is encouraged to conduct a peer review utilizing an off-campus committee. The committee is encouraged to evaluate the program on the same items as the Self Analysis. The peer review analysis should incorporate the use of at least 3 peers within the academic disciplines offered in the collegiate unit, with at least one individual being from out-of-state. Due: December 1.
3. Academic Administrative Review – upon the conclusion of the Self Analysis and Peer Analysis, the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs in conjunction with the Academic Council Executive Committee, will review each analysis and formulate a plan on how each collegiate unit is inter-related to the University Strategic Plan and University Imperatives. Due: February 1.
4. The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will then review the results with the President as part of an administrative review and managerial decision-making.