The systematic and recurring review of academic programs at CWRU is an essential component of the university’s efforts to foster excellence and achievement of its strategic goals. The periodic review of undergraduate academic program identifies opportunities and strategies for maintaining quality and currency. The process is designed to provide critical information to faculty and administrators so that necessary changes can be made to maintain and advance program quality. In addition, pursuit of a systematic program review process to improve academic quality and effectiveness are requirements of CWRU’s institutional accreditation as defined by the Higher Learning Commission (HLC).
Key Features and Elements of Program Review
Academic program reviews (not associated with accreditation reviews) are to occur every 8 years according to a published timetable included in this document. Important characteristics of the academic program review include the following:
- the reviews should be evaluative and forward looking;
- the reviews should be fair and transparent as well as distinct from other reviews; and
- the reviews must result in action.
Key components of the academic program review include:
- A candid and critical self-assessment and articulation of future directions by the faculty and leadership of the academic unit
- Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the academic unit by experts from outside CWRU who can evaluate the program’s overall quality including its faculty, academic programs, students, curricula, resources, and future opportunities
- Appraisal of a unit’s future potential and identification of priorities for making improvements in quality and reputation
- Agreement at the levels of the faculty, dean, and provost on the priorities, action items, and a timeline for implementation necessary to advance excellence in the academic unit
Quality Standards
The academic program review should include an assessment of the quality in the following areas:
1. Program Faculty
A level of faculty productivity and commitment shall be required commensurate with expectations of the program faculty as indicated by the following measures:
- The number and qualifications of faculty members are judged to be adequate for offering the undergraduate degrees in the specified areas
- The preparation and experience of the faculty are appropriate for offering the degrees in an intellectually challenging academic environment as demonstrated by active scholarship and creative activity judged by accepted national standards for the discipline
2. Graduates from the Program over the Current Review Period
A level of student satisfaction, student accomplishment, and graduate accomplishment exists as evidenced by the following:
- Students express satisfaction with advisement, teaching, and program support services
- The structure and conduct of the program lead to an appropriate persistence and degreecompletion rates and time-to-degree
- The predominant employment of graduates after graduation is in fields consistent with the mission of the program
- Graduates demonstrate preparation for career-long learning and success as indicated by periodic surveys of career changes, job satisfaction, and relevance of their degrees to various career opportunities
3. Program Vitality
A vital academic program is dynamic and could possess the following indicators:
- The environment of the program promotes a high level of intellectual interaction among students, faculty, and the larger academic community
- The curriculum has been updated during the period under review with disciplinary developments
- Essential resources are provided (e.g., library materials, computer support, laboratory facilities and equipment, student financial support, etc.)
- Requirements for completion of the degree are deemed appropriate to the degree
4. Program Demand
The academic program should be able to demonstrate that there is demand on the part of students and that it is fulfilling a clear need through the following:
- Student enrollment statistics during the period under review, other indicators as appropriate
- The extent to which the program meets community, region and state needs and occupational societal demands.
5. Program Interactions
Academic programs do not exist in isolation but rather in relation to other cognate areas. Information regarding appropriate interactions could include:
- Contributions of the units to general education at CWRU
- The participation of the faculty in interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary teaching or research activities
- The academic unit’s support of institutional goals, such as contributions to internationalization efforts, promotion of undergraduate research and creative endeavors, experiential learning, etc.
- Interactions among undergraduate and graduate/professional students and staff, as appropriate
- Programmatic access to special leveraging assets such as unique on-campus or off-campus facilities, non-university experts or collaborative institutions in the discipline, industrial or other support, endowments, as well as special funding opportunities.
6. Program Access
There should be evidence that the program has established or seeks to establish an appropriate level of diversity among its faculty and student body, as evidenced by:
- Proven efforts to sustain and enhance diversity of faculty and students.
7. Learning Assessment Mechanisms Used in Program Review
Since quality indicators are increasingly becoming an integral part of ongoing program review, an enhanced recognition of the uses of learning outcomes assessment in the review process provides a useful tool for program improvement, as demonstrated by:
- A summary of the appropriate educational outcome measures used to assess program quality; and
- Procedures must be in place to ensure the use of educational outcome assessment data for continuous quality improvement of the program.
Updated December 20, 2025