Checklist for Assessment of Baccalaureate Programs

Effective Fall 2005

Institution: ______________________________________________________________________

Program: ________________________________________________________________________

^{Title Degree Designation(s) CIP Code}

Instructions for External Reviewers:

In accordance with the 2005-10 Performance Funding guidelines of the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC), each non-accreditable undergraduate program undergoes external peer review according to a pre-approved review cycle.

The criteria used to evaluate a program appear in the following "Checklist for Assessment of Baccalaureate Programs." The Checklist consists of 30 criteria grouped into five categories. THEC will use the criteria designated with an asterisk (*) to assess standards in the baccalaureate programs. The remaining criteria, including all criteria in the fifth category, Support, will be used by the institution, but will not be included in the overall assessment reported to THEC.

For each criterion within a standard, the responsible program has provided evidence in the form of a Self Study document. Supporting documents will be available as specified in the self study. As the external reviewer, you should evaluate this evidence and any other evidence observed during the site visit to determine whether each criterion within a standard has been met. A checkmark should be placed in the appropriate box to indicate whether you believe that a program has “met” or “not met” each criterion within the six standards in the table that follows. If a particular criterion should be inappropriate or not applicable to the program under review, the item should be marked “NA”.

This evaluation becomes a part of the record of the academic program review. The checklist will be shared with the department, the college and central administration, as well as the Tennessee Higher Education Commission. When combined with the written report, prepared by the entire program review committee, the checklist will facilitate development of a program action plan to ensure continuous quality improvement.

Your judgment of the criteria designated by an asterisk on this form (see standards 1-5) will be used in allocating state funds for the university's budget.

Name, Title, and Institutional Affiliation of Reviewer(s):

__________________________________ ________________________________________

^{Name Name}

__________________________________ ________________________________________

^{Title Title}

___________________________________ ________________________________________

^{Institution Institution}

___________________________________ ________________________________________

^{Signature Date Signature Date}

Checklist for Assessment of Baccalaureate Programs

Criteria for			Evaluation Results
1. PROGRAM OUTCOMES			Met	Not Met
*	1.1	Intended program and learning outcomes are clearly identified.
*	1.2	The program uses appropriate indicators to evaluate appropriate and sufficient achievement of program outcomes.
*	1.3	The unit makes use of information from its evaluation of program outcome attainment; student, alumni, and employer surveys; and university research to strengthen the program's effectiveness.
2. CURRICULUM			Met	Not Met
*	2.1	The curriculum is appropriate to the level and purpose of the program.
*	2.2	The curriculum content and organization is reviewed regularly.
*	2.3	Program requirements include a strong general education component.
*	2.4	The curriculum includes a required core of appropriate courses in the discipline.
	2.5	An appropriate balance is maintained between courses inside the major and outside the major.
*	2.6	Curricular content reflects current standards, practices, and issues in the discipline.
*	2.7	The curriculum encourages the development of critical thinking.
*	2.8	The curriculum exposes students to appropriate research strategies from the program area and students have the opportunity to participate in research.
*	2.9	Students have opportunities to apply what they have learned to situations outside the classroom.
*	2.10	Students are exposed to professional and career opportunities appropriate to the field.
*	2.11	The program uses appropriate indicators to evaluate appropriate and sufficient achievement in service courses.
*	2.12	Courses are offered regularly to ensure that students can make timely progress.
3. TEACHING AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT			Met	Not Met
*	3.1	The program's instructional practices are consistent with the standards of the discipline.
*	3.2	As appropriate to the discipline, the program provides students with the opportunity for interaction with one another, faculty, and professionals in the field.
*	3.3	Effective advising is provided by well-informed faculty and/or professional staff.
*	3.4	Library holdings are current and adequate to meet students' needs.
*	3.5	The program seeks to include the perspectives and experiences of underrepresented groups through curricular and extracurricular activities.
*	3.6	Students have the opportunity to regularly evaluate faculty relative to the quality of their teaching effectiveness.

4. FACULTY			Met	Not Met
*	4.1	The faculty is adequate in number to meet the needs of the program with appropriate teaching loads.
	4.2	As appropriate to the demographics of the discipline, the faculty are diverse with respect to gender, ethnicity, and academic background.
*	4.3	Faculty are appropriately prepared for the level of the program, at least meeting SACS requirements for faculty preparation.
*	4.4	Faculty are engaged in scholarly, creative, professional association, and service activities that enhance instructional expertise in their areas of specialty.
	4.5	Adjunct faculty meet the high standards set by the program and expected SACS qualifications and credentials.
*	4.6	The unit uses a faculty evaluation system to improve teaching, scholarly and creative activities, and service.
5. SUPPORT			Met	Not Met
	5.1	The unit regularly evaluates its equipment and facilities, encouraging necessary improvements within the context of overall college resources.
	5.2	The program's operating budget is consistent with the needs of the program.
	5.3	The program has a history of enrollment and graduation rates sufficient to sustain high quality and cost-effectiveness.
SUMMARY EVALUATION			Yes	No
	The program meets or exceeds the minimum standards of good practice.

*Criterion included in the performance funding calculation.