• 1. Review Timelines and Institutional Schedule: A timeline for required CPR submissions (USG guidelines) and the institutional sequence of program reviews can be found in the GC Timeline/Schedule link on the CPR website. No program review cycle at any level shall exceed ten years in accordance with BOR guidelines (USG BOR Policy Manual Section 3.6.3; BOR Academic Affairs Handbook section 2.3.6).
• 2. Method of Submission: Adhering to the timeline found in the CPR template and on the GC CPR website (Timeline and Schedule), all materials must be submitted in electronic format to the Dean and the Director of Institutional Effectiveness. The Director of Institutional Effectiveness will then coordinate the review conducted by the VPAA/Office of the Provost. Finally, the document in its entirety (including recommendations from Dean and Provost) is uploaded to USG's SharePoint no later than June 30th.
• 3. Notification of CPR: The Director of Institutional Effectiveness in coordination with the Office of the Provost will be responsible for notifying those programs that they are entering their cycles of program review no later than August, and for ensuring that the supporting materials are distributed by November 15.
• 4. Focus of CPR: Comprehensive Program Review is review of degree programs, not of the departments that deliver the degrees.
• 5. Each program should evaluate its annual collected data in terms of the following criteria:
  • a. Productivity: the number and contributions of graduates of an academic program and/or the number of students served through service courses in the context of the resources committed to its operation. (Additional measures of productivity might include counts of students who meet their educational goals through the program's offerings, including minors, certificates, or job enhancement, if such goals are part of the program's mission.)
  • b. Viability: the use of such considerations as available resources, student interest, career opportunities, and contributions to the goals and mission of the institution, University System, and state to determine whether a program should be continued as is or modified (expanded, curtailed, consolidated, or eliminated). Viability considerations are independent of quality measures; i.e., a high quality program could lack viability, or a program in need of considerable improvement could have high viability
  • c. Quality: measures of excellence. Quality indicators may include, but are not limited to, attainment of student learning outcomes, a comparison of program elements relative to internal and external benchmarks, resources, accreditation criteria, relevant external indicators of program success (e.g., license and certification results, placement in graduate schools, job placement, and awards and honors received by the program), and other standards.
• 6. The template provided must be used to complete the CPR.