•/ 

.Senate ? 

M.Mu' 

Chairman, 

...............       

Sei:it..ft....21. 

e

1

Planning 

SubIect..PXQP.Oi..GthiProgram 

Review 

?

5 ...° 

.

............. 

.

--

98

At its meeting of March 15, 1981 the Senate Committee on 

Academic Planning approved the attached guidelines for Program 

Review. As explained in the attached memorandum, the guidelines 

are intended to assist the Committee in carrying out its revised 

terms of reference. In addition, the part of the guidelines that 

deals with the review of existing programs is intended to replace 

the departmental review procedures established in paper S-224 in 

1969. These provided for mandatory external reviews of each 

department within the University every five years. The first 

round of reviews was completed in 1976 but no department has been 

reviewed a second time. If the motions proposed in this paper 

are approved, departments will be reviewed when such a review is 

S

deemed necessary and useful rather than on a regular schedule. 

The following motions are proposed for Senate approval: 

1.

That Senate approve the program review guidelines set out 

in the attached paper. 

2.

That Senate 

rescind 

the departmental review procedures 

established in Senate documents S-224 and S.72-130. 

Note: The intent of these two motions is to super 

s

ede and 

replace the procedures established in earlier documents 

by the present propo 

so

J. M. Munro 

urn

Attach. 

cc: J. Chase 

Copies of Paper s.72-130 are available from Secretariat 

Services on request. 

Program Review 

....... 

Munr,o 

. ?

As revised in Paper S-80-166 

1

the Senate Committee on Academic 

Planning has three major terms of reference. The first of these, the 

implementation of a system of academic planning, is presently being 

addressed by a series of planning task forces. The second and 

third involve reviewing and recommending to Senate concerning pro- 

posals for new programs or major modifications to 

existing 

programs 

and the review of existing programs for the purposes of 

expansion, curtailment 

or discontinuance. 

These proposed guide- 

lines for program review are intended to address these latter two 

responsibilities of the Committee. 

The proposed guidelines for program review are as follows: 

. ?

1. According to the definition of Universities Council, "A 

program is a sequence of credit courses leading to a Univer- 

sity credential. A credential is a diploma, certificate, 

degree or other type of official recognition awarded to a 

student by a University." 

2.

Decisions concerning whether proposed changes to existing 

programs are "major," and therefore fall within the terms of 

reference of SCAP, will be made jointly by the Secretary of 

Senate and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Academic 

Planning. 

3.

New programs are to be brought forward for approval in 

principle well 

in

advance of detailed, program preparation. 

The purpose of seeking in principle approval is to guide 

departments and individual faculty members away from program 

planning that is inconsistent with long-term University goals 

and resources. Assistance 

program planning will be co- 

ordinated by the office of the Vice-President, Academic. 

4.

When a program that 

has

received in principle approval is 

presented for full approval by the Senate Committee on Academic 

Planning, the following information will be included: 

a. A statement on the academic merit and importance 

of the program and its impact on other programs 

. . . 2 

• ? 

-

Members, Senate 

Committee -2- 

?

February 

25

1

1981

on Academic Planning 

•

cont. 

?

a. in the University. 

b.

Enrollment projections. 

c.

Staffing and other financial requirements. 

d.

Space requirements. 

Advice concerning the preparation of this material may be 

obtained from the office of Analytical Studies. 

In considering its recommendations, the Senate Committee on 

Academic Planning will follow the "Criteria for program 

Assessment" contained in paper 5-80-98 

(sea Appendix A to.; 

this memorandum). The responsibility of the 

Senate Committee 

on Academic Planning is to assess the academic merit of 

programs but not to make a decision as to whether funds should 

actually be spent on the program. However, SCAP does have a 

role in assessing the 

reasonableness 

of estimated resource 

-..-needs o 

I

new programs. Also, this information does interact 

with considerations of academic merit. 

5.

The Senate Committee on Academic Planning will recommend to 

•

?

the President on the 

priorities 

to be attached to new programs 

as required by 

the UCBC Program Co-ordinating Committee. 

6.

In recognition of the deadlines of the UCBC 

Program co-ordinating 

Committee, the 

annual deadline 

for' receipt of new program sub- 

missions for 

final approval 

by the Senate Committee on Academic 

Planning will be October 20th. 

7.

xsting 

programs may be referred for 

revieya(,aesemeflt 

the Senate Commit 

te on Academic 

of

the Faculty Iq 

the' 

mys

1sat(,) 

y

b

?

the Vice-President, 

Academic, 

or M 

1ete1-by 

Senate at ths 

tLma ' 

*

mwL. The criteria attached in Appendix A will guide the 

review and assessment of existing programs. 

J.

M. Munro 

urn

Attach. 

It is expected that the identification of the purposes 

to which Simon Fraser will direct its efforts and energies 

will oncourage and facilitate the 

number 

of new and innovative programs.sslgning priorities to 

various proposals 

difficult task. Ranking should 

be based partly on how a proposal is measured against the 

followin 

characteristics. 

1.

The program has intrinsic 

excellence and 

is something 

this Universit 

can expect to do well 

2.

The program substantially enriches the existing 

teaching programs of the university. 

3.

The program builds 

existing programs and 

resources in the University. 

4.

The program anticipates provincial or national 

needs. 

5.

The program does not unnecessarily duplicate 

existing programs at other universities in the 

Province. 

6.

The excellence of the program attracts studentS 

to the university. 

Existing programs 

also be subject to periodic 

keview. Such reviews provide an opportunity to asseSø 

individual programs and to provide a basis for recomending 

their expansions curtailment or dincOntiflUanCe. 

by Senate at its meeting of July 7 

1