CPR--Comprehensive Program Review
COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM REVIEW (CPR)
POLICY: Board of Regents Policy Manual 3.6.3, http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section3/policy/C341/
USG Academic Affairs Handbook: 2.3.6, www.usg.edu/academic_affairs_handbook/section2/handbook/C731/
All institutions within the University System of Georgia (USG) are required to conduct a periodic comprehensive review of each academic degree program. Board of Regents (BOR) policy and guidelines for comprehensive program review are located in the Policy Manual and the Academic Affairs Handbook, as noted above.
The goal of comprehensive program review (CPR) is the progressive improvement of academic degree programs over time by analyzing information gathered during a cyclical review period. “Consistent with efforts in institutional effectiveness and strategic planning, each USG institution shall develop procedures to evaluate the effectiveness of its academic programs to address the quality, viability, and productivity of efforts in teaching and learning, scholarship, and service as appropriate to the institution’s mission.” CPR allows GC to examine the strengths and weaknesses of its programs and thus to make informed strategic decisions for continuous improvement of academic degree programs. This process has been developed to adhere to BOR policy, while simultaneously recognizing the unique mission of our institution.
Comprehensive program review (CPR) is review of academic degree programs, not the departments that deliver the degrees. While policies, resources, and faculty of the department may be relevant as inputs into the program, the focus should always be on assessment of the program to improve effectiveness. Throughout this section, the term “program” shall be interpreted as “academic degree program.” In addition, general education, taken for these purposes as the core curriculum, is reviewed through CPR every five years, per USG policy.
The CPR review process includes an internal self-study analysis by the program faculty, an external peer review, feedback from the college Dean, and feedback from the Provost.
The internal analysis is conducted by a faculty review committee, which may or may not include the department chair, composed of faculty teaching in the program. This group is charged with reviewing the program’s mission statement and the relevant data for the review cycle (5-7 years, see “CPR Review Cycles” section for more) in the categories of Viability, Quality, and Productivity. Institutional data shall be provided by the Office of the Provost. In addition to a thorough self-study of the current state of the program, the faculty review committee shall set goals and determine a 5-year plan of action to support achievement of the goals in the categories of Viability, Quality, and Productivity. Faculty review committees shall review and report on data from the program’s recent SMART reports on student learning outcomes in the Quality section. In addition to institutional data, the faculty review committee may draw on external resources, e.g. discipline-specific data from a professional organization, as it deems appropriate.
The external review committee for a given program shall consist of three to five GC faculty members, all external to the program. A maximum of one member of the external review committee may be selected from the college of the program under review; all other members must be from outside the college. Each member of the external review committee must hold faculty rank. In a given year, multiple programs may undergo CPR review, and hence an external review committee is needed for each program. A group of faculty sufficient for the review process is nominated by college Deans. A single faculty member may serve on the external review committee for more than one program, provided the guidelines above are followed in each case.
After the external review committee’s report has been sent to the faculty review committee, the final CPR self-study report is submitted to the college Dean. The Dean responds to the program’s self-study and makes suggestions in light of the current state of the program, on goals set, and on the 5-year action plan, bringing to bear a college-level perspective for the program under review.
All CPR reports, feedback, and data are then sent by the Dean to the Provost. The Provost provides feedback and makes suggestions, bringing to bear a university-level perspective for the program under review. The Provost’s feedback is sent to the department chair, with a copy to the Dean. Reports and data for the CPR review are then posted to Georgia College’s secure-access CPR website, per USG policy, maintained for spot audits of CPR process and materials conducted by the USG. Any changes recommended as a result of CPR review, e.g. “program enhancement, maintenance at the current level, reduction in scope, or, if fully justified, consolidation or termination,” shall be carried out through the standard university channels of updating curriculum.