Purpose

Under USask’s Academic Program Review (APR) process, all undergraduate and graduate programs undergo systematic 10-year reviews to:

  • Ensure optimal learning experiences in a robust environment.
  • Facilitate critical reflection and transparent assessment of program strengths and weaknesses, for valuable improvement recommendations.
  • Inform program revision, renewal, and strategic planning decisions.
  • Demonstrates accountability to key stakeholders, including governments, the university’s governing bodies, and the public.
  • Align with SHEQAB standards.1

Benefits

  • Predictable intervals for examining program quality.
  • Feedback and recommendations from external academic leaders.
  • Identify program strengths.
  • Provides valuable program information for internal decision-making.
  • Opportunities for deans/directors to address resource and planning needs.
  • Focus on quality enhancement of teaching and learning for improved student experiences.

1. The university’s commitment to the systematic review of academic programs is in line with the standard presented by the Saskatchewan Higher Education Quality Assurance Board (SHEQAB), which states that “The institution implements a periodic external program review and assessment process to ensure the ongoing currency of the program and the quality of its learning outcomes” (Quality Assurance Review Process: Program Review Standards and Criteria, 2014, p. 9).

Academic Program Review Process

Flowchart of Academic Review Process

Review Notification

  • The Office of the Provost and Vice-President Academic (Office of the PVPA) on behalf of the deputy provost, contacts dean and department heads (or only dean/director, as applicable) about upcoming review based on the 10-year cyclical schedule.
  • Undergraduate and graduate programs managed by the same academic unit are usually reviewed simultaneously (if possible).
  • In cases where a unit undergoes a regular accreditation review, consideration will be given to the academic program review schedule to determine if it makes sense for the reviews to be scheduled concurrently in the same academic year or in separate years.

Initiating the Process

  • The Assessment and Analytics team within the Office of the PVPA meets with deans and department heads to:
    • address any academic unit concerns.
    • discuss review procedures in detail including self-study report development, review team recruitment, and site visit planning.
  • Review initiation meetings are normally scheduled after review notification.

Self-Study Committee Selection and Composition

  • Department head, dean, and program faculty (or dean/director when applicable) collaborate to select Self-Study Committee (i.e. group that will be tasked with completing the self-study).
  • Committee size varies based on program size and at the discretion of the program leaders but it is important to involve faculty members in this process.
  • Administrative staff members should be included, when possible, to assist with data gathering and site visit tasks.

Self-Study Report Template and Data Gathering

  • Office of the PVPA:
    • Provides a comprehensive self-study report template.
    • Collaborates with Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Teaching, Learning and Student Experience (TLSE), the University Library, and other units to collect program data including enrolment, funding, and other aspects of the program (institutional data definitions will be used to ensure consistency and transparency). ;
    • Administers student and alumni surveys to gather feedback on programs under review.
  • Self-Study Committee comments on survey results in the report.

Self-Study Report Preparation

  • Self-Study Committee reviews the report template and collects necessary information.
  • Additional data and background information may be required from the academic unit.
  • Support from TLSE team is available for curriculum mapping and learning outcomes development.
  • The Self-Study Committee has a chance to review, edit, and revise all aspects of the self-study to ensure it is insightful for the review process.

Finalizing the Self-Study Report

  • Self-Study Committee completes the report at least four weeks before the site visit.
  • Allows relevant leaders and program faculty to review the report.
  • Office of the PVPA assists with final document production, organization, and distribution.

Distribution of Self-Study Report

  • Copies provided to the review team, deputy provost, dean of CGPS, and Office of Teaching and Learning for the site visit.

Review Team Composition

  • Typically comprised of two external reviewers (from other universities) and one internal reviewer (from the University of Saskatchewan).
  • Self-Study Committee, with input from the department head and dean, select at least six external reviewer nominees and three internal reviewer nominees.
  • Final nominees will be approved by the Office of PVPA to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest.

Role of Internal and External Reviewers

  • Internal reviewer serves in an advisory role. They are:
    • not expected to contribute to the External Review Report
    • are expected to participate in the site visit.
  • Their purpose is to aid in the Review Team's understanding of the academic environment and are able to share best practices from their own experience.
  • External reviewers are esteemed scholars, preferably from Canadian universities, or internationally (if travel expenses are reasonable) that able to provide sound judgement on the merit of the academic programs under review.

Nomination Process Oversight

  • The Assessment and Analytics team will confer with the deputy provost in reviewing and approving nominations.
    • The deputy provost may request additional rationale or suggest a change in nominations.
  • the Office of the PVPA will contact nominees (in order of preference) to determine availability and interest in serving.
  • Notification sent to the academic unit upon confirmation of participating nominees.
  • The Office of the PVPA will provide a summary of nominee appointments.

Communication and Orientation

  • Office of the PVPA communicates with the Review Team via email, outlining the Academic Review Process, with what expectations are for members.
  • Close to the date of the site visit, a virtual orientation meeting will be held with the Review Team before the site visit to ensure understanding of the process and confirm plans for the review.

Site Visit Logistics

  • Site visits are conducted in-person or virtually (depending on the programming area and requirements for the review).
  • Office of the PVPA collaborates with external reviewers and the academic unit to set suitable dates: typically two days for in-person visits or two/three week timeframe for virtual engagements.
    • Dates are determined by the program leaders’ preference and by reviewer availability (with consideration for avoiding Reading Week or exam times so students and other key stakeholders are able to fully participate in the review).
  • Typically, reviews are scheduled in the October/November timeframe or February/March timeframe.

Agenda Organization and Stakeholder Involvement

  • Once site visit dates are confirmed, Office of the PVPA initiates the organization of the site visit agenda.
  • Academic unit assists with the development of the agenda by identifying and confirming key stakeholder participation.

Support and Preparation

  • The Office of the PVPA will provide dedicated support for both the academic unit and the Review Team throughout the entire review process.
  • Meeting details and attendees are finalized a week before the site visit.
  • Stakeholders will receive advance information about the Review Team and meeting purposes.

Travel Coordination and Site Visit Logistics

  • For in-person reviews, the Office of the PVPA coordinates external reviewers' travel arrangements, typically arriving the day before the two-day review process and departing on the second day or the subsequent morning.
  • For in-person reviews, stakeholder meetings usually take place in one location chosen by the academic unit for efficiency and require stakeholders to come to them.
  • External reviewers typically chair stakeholder meetings.
  • For virtual reviews, the Office of the PVPA helps determine the most efficient technology for review team and stakeholder interactions.

External Review Report Template

  • A template for the External Review Report will be provided to the Review Team as an optional format.
  • The external reviewers are expected to complete the External Review Report within 30 days of the site visit.
  • This report assesses program quality and provides enhancement recommendations.
  • Copy of the report distributed to relevant parties:
    • Dean/Director or department head
    • Dean of CGPS
    • Deputy Provost
    • Associate Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning
    • Academic Programs Committee of University Council.

Response and Action Plan Process

  • Program leaders are tasked with responding to the External Review Report recommendations within 30 days of receiving the report.
  • This response forms the basis for an action plan approved by the program's dean (in departmentalized units).
  • Response distributed to the same stakeholders who received the External Review Report.

Teaching and Learning Support

  • TLSE and Gwenna Moss Centre for Teaching and Learning (GMCTL) are available to support the program leaders to implement recommendations pertaining to teaching and learning, including curriculum development, assessment, and professional development.
  • Financial support may be available for teaching and learning support. Please contact the Gwenna Moss Center for Teaching and Learning for more information.

Review Summary

  • Office of PVPA, on behalf of deputy provost, drafts summary memo which summarizes the details and outcomes of the review.
  • The memo highlights key aspects of the review including:
    • List of programs under review
    • Review Team composition and date/type of review
    • Outcomes of the review

Communication and Publication

  • Academic Programs Committee receives updates on the APR schedule, process, and completed reviews.
  • Updates on the review process are published on the Office of PVPA's website.

Action Plan Implementation

  • Dean and department head (or dean/director where applicable) are responsible for implementing recommendations from the review (I.e. “the action plan”).

Progress Reporting

  • An update on implementation progress will be provided to the deputy provost and shared with the Academic Programs Committee, within two years of a review completion.
  • Depending on outcomes the deputy provost may request the initial update be provided sooner based on review outcomes.

Review Schedule

The schedule for academic program reviews is based on a 10-year cycle whereby every graduate and undergraduate program will be reviewed once in a 10-year period. The current schedule is available and is subject to revision based on accommodating competing priorities, resource availability, and accreditation processes.

Review Summaries

Once a review is completed, an External Review Report is provided to the university by the Review Team. A summary of review details and outcomes from each review are combined into a Review Summary. Summaries for completed reviews are provided here, according to the academic year in which each review was conducted:

Further details about the outcomes of these reviews can be submitted to the Assessment and Analytics Team within the Office of the Provost and Vice-President Academic.

Supporting Documents

Questions?

For more information about the Academic Review process, please contact the Assessment and Analytics team.