What is a Program Review?

Program reviews provide a faculty-centered forum to review curricula of instructional programs. The purpose of this process is to review curricula as a whole, including how identified outcomes meet student learning needs, and how assessment is being used to improve the program. The review provides opportunities to identify areas of the curriculum that are especially strong, as well as areas that need updating or revision.

The review involves dialogue and interaction among program faculty and Program Review Committee members (who are also faculty) using a standard set of documents as background information. Workforce and academic programs are currently reviewed on a 5-year cycle.

The PRC establishes an annual schedule of deadlines for written and oral program reviews. The chair works with the administrator to ensure that program reviews do not conflict with major obligations or workload issues (such as a move or change in faculty) within a given program. The program’s administrator is responsible for ensuring faculty participation in the process.

What does a Program Review entail?

  1. A standard set of documents is submitted to the review chair.
  2. Members of the PRC review and evaluate documents using a rubric.
  3. A face-to-face conversation is held for program faculty, program administrators, and PRC members. This meeting typically lasts for about 2 hours and minutes are recorded.
  4. Within two weeks of the oral review, the review chair will prepare a preliminary report.
  5. When there are questions or concerns, the program has 2 weeks (not including summer) to respond.
  6. The review chair has another week to prepare the final report, which is sent to the program administrator, full time faculty and the Vice President for Instruction, and housed on the CCC website.
  7. Within two years of the program review the PRC chair will follow up with the program to inquire about progress made toward the proposed recommendations. An addendum to the final report will summarize the progress.

Which documents are required for a Program Review?

Three weeks before the review, the PRC requests one hard copy (double sided preferred, will be returned post-review) and one electronic copy (link to a google drive site will be provided for file transfer) of the following:

  • A summary of activities and progress since the last program review as well as a copy of the last program review. Please document your program's recent accomplishments and goals for the next several years.
  • One completed course outline table.
  • Master course outlines and a few representative syllabi for each course that is regularly taught. Organize the outlines and syllabi together according to course number. For instance, the ENGL 101 outline and syllabi should be grouped together, followed by the ENGL 102 outline and syllabi, etc. (Outlines are available at Inside Seattle Colleges, Automated Course Approval, Course Inventory. Include both the District Master Course Outline and Central College Supplemental. If you do not see a course, request the MCO from Mark Baumann.)
  • Three year enrollment data—headcount/FTEs by quarter— will be provided to programs before the review by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness
  • Visual aid or brief description of the scope and sequence of the program, including how a student moves through the program. Visual aid can be your current program map. If the program supports the AA or AS degree, those maps can be provided in lieu of a program map.
  • The latest assessment report or explanation of assessment activities and any other program level reports you may have generated (Contact the IAC chair, Tsai-En Cheng, to obtain a copy of your most recent report).
  • Url to program web pages, if any

What will be discussed at the meeting?

The meeting is an unscripted conversation that may include some or all of these topics:

  • Commendations and program strengths
  • Changes in the program since the previous curriculum review - have faculty acted on the recommendations from the previous review?
  • Currency and relevance of the curriculum in relation to the program’s and college’s mission and outcomes
  • Whether or not Master Course Outlines at the district level and college level have been updated to reflect what faculty are teaching in the classroom
  • Whether or not syllabi list the same course learning outcomes as the Master Course Outline
  • Alignment of college, program and course learning outcomes
  • Whether or not syllabi are following best practices (up to date ADA & Title IX statements, listing course learning outcomes, show consistency between sections, list a grading scale, etc.)
  • Outcomes assessment and planning (what's working and what's not?)
  • Enrollment trends
  • Concerns and areas for curriculum improvement
  • Concerns of program faculty related to curriculum, instruction, and support