Systematic Program Review Guide:

Using Data Effectively & Producing a Meaningful

Report
Version 0.99
May 2, 2017
 The Syracuse University Context

Syracuse University has distinctive strengths as an institution with its

many autonomous schools, colleges, and departments
Our decentralized nature has gradually led to the accumulation of a
very large portfolio of programs, in part because we have lacked a
periodic mechanism for review
Our regional accreditor, the Middle States Commission, expects that
we will periodically review each of the programs we offer
Program review provides a systematic, faculty-centric process by
which we periodically check that our portfolio of programs provides
the best possible learning opportunities to our students in light of our
institutional capacities

Syracuse University | 2016

 Academic
Strategic
Plan

School/College School/College School/College

Strategic Plan Strategic Plan Strategic Plan

Dean’s Office
Assessment Program Review Budget Planning
(Functional Areas)

nt
Stu

me
en ss
d

t Le se
arnin As
g Out comes

Syracuse University | 2016

 Stewardship
Middle States Institutional Levers
Are we good stewards of

students’ tuition dollars

other Federal funds
students’ tuition dollars? received via Federal our endowment funds?
(e.g. NSF)?
sources?

We demonstrate stewardship via

Strategic Planning
Program Review Assessment
Institutional Level
School/College/Division Level School/College/Division Level
School/College/Division Level
Department/Unit Level Department/Unit Level
Department/Unit Level

Our documented efforts demonstrate

Institutional Effectiveness

Syracuse University | 2016

 The Review Criteria: Quality, Centrality,
Demand, and Cost Effectiveness
Quality Centrality to Demand Cost-effectiveness
mission
 Student learning Demonstration of  Five-year trend  Total faculty
outcomes tie to mission and of student and staff
assessment results strategic plan at majors supporting
 Retention and institution and  Five-year trend program
graduation rates school/college of degrees  Faculty FTE
 Certification or levels (usually awarded per semester
licensing exam pass described in a  Five-year trend credit hour of
rates (if applicable) narrative, e.g., of applications instruction
 Post-graduate value proposition to program  Instructional
outcomes documentation) cost per
(employment, semester
graduate school) credit hours
of instruction
 Class size

The program review guide provides a list of additional, optional data sources.
Syracuse University | 2016
 The Program Review Process
All programs reviewed on a four-year cycle, therefore about 1/4th of
programs within each school/college each year
Detailed process is unique for each school/college, but minimally
includes program faculty, curriculum committee, dean’s office

Faculty analyze program and report results

Dean’s Office: Analyzes whole school/college Program Portfolio

Provost's Office: Matches program portfolios strategic plans of schools/colleges

Syracuse University | 2016

 Program Review Cycle

Syracuse University | 2016

 Program Review Timeline

Syracuse University | 2016

 Program Review Recommendations

Most Common: Program continues with

recommendations for quality improvement based
on assessment data
Less Common: Program merges with another,
similar program to gain strength, quality, or
effectiveness
Rare: Program closes for lack of student
demand, notable quality deficiencies, or other
persistent difficulties

Syracuse University | 2016

 Getting Access to Data: Quality

• Student learning outcomes assessment results

(in your G:AAF:AP-Provost-S/C_name
directory and eventually in TK20)
• Retention and graduation rates (provided by
OIRA)
• Certification or licensing exam pass rates (if
applicable; maintained within school/college)
• Post-graduation outcomes (employment,
salary levels, graduate school; maintained
within school/college)

Syracuse University | 2016

 Getting Access to Data: Centrality
• Program history and origins (from school/college records)
• Value proposition document (available from
marketing/admissions)
• Graduate Enrollment Report (available from graduate school)
• Instructor data (provided by OIRA)

Syracuse University | 2016

 Getting Access to Data: Demand
Low Enrollment Class Report

Enrollment trends (supplied by

OIRA; selected graduate
programs also have graduate
enrollment reports available
form the graduate school)
Admissions pool data
(undergraduate: available
from admissions; graduate:
available from school/college
records)
Low enrollment class report

Syracuse University | 2016

 Getting Access to Data: Cost Effectiveness

Total faculty and staff supporting program (from MSPR dataset)

Faculty distribution over instructional duties (from MSPR dataset)
Minimum, maximum, typical class size (from MSPR dataset)
Instructional cost per semester credit hours of instruction (infer from
data above)

Syracuse University | 2016

 Program Report Template

The Office of Institutional

Effectiveness and Assessment
provides a report template to complete
For most programs, the completed
report will comprise about three pages
plus appendices
Two to three hours of total writing time
per report, not counting data collection
or meetings
Most important section to develop:
“Analysis of Strengths and Areas
for Improvement”
Syracuse University | 2016
 Curriculum Committee Report Template

Dean’s Office considers the complete set

of programs for the year and
recommends outcomes
Report template provides a standard way
of documenting each recommendation
Less than one hour writing time for
recommendation report, not counting
reading program report(s) and meeting(s)
Most important section to develop:
“Recommendation Justification”

Syracuse University | 2016