Instructional Program Review


In accordance with the Utah State Board of Regents Policy R411, all instructional programs will be reviewed periodically to improve educational quality. Program review recommendations will focus on the quality and effectiveness of each credential in the program, including degrees and certificate programs.


With oversight and direction from deans, associate deans and qualified teaching faculty have primary responsibility for reviewing existing programs. The Provost’s Office coordinates the process and supports departments as needed. The Board of Trustees and Board of Regents oversee the process.


Programs are reviewed three years after initial approval and every five years after initial review. Programs that maintain specialized accreditation may choose to submit letter(s) and report(s) from the accrediting organization in lieu of conducting and submitting a program review.

Review Phases

  1. Department completes a self-study of instructional programs.
  2. Review Committee evaluates self-study, conducts a site visit, and provides an evaluation report.
  3. Associate Dean responds to Review Committee report → submits self-study, Review Committee report, and response to Dean. These three documents, combined with the Data Table, are the “Program Review”.
  4. Dean responds to the Program Review → submits review and response to the Provost’s Office (cc: Curriculum Office).
  5. Provost responds and presents the Program Review to SLCC Executive Cabinet.
  6. Cabinet responds to SLCC Board of Trustees.
  7. Program Review submitted to Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education for evaluation and presentation to the Utah State Board of Regents.

Process Overview

1. Planning

The Dean and Associate Dean are responsible for the program to meet defined outcomes and identify areas needing particular attention. They pan and conduct the Review Committee's site visit and evaluation of the program(s).

2. Program Self-Study

Faculty and students will participate in the program self-study, which will consist of an in-depth self-appraisal of program activities including assessment, strategic planning, goal formulation and the decision-making process. In cases where deficiencies exist, the department will initiate a course of action to remedy deficiencies. If major departures from standard indicators of productivity exist, the department will justify these departures. A required data table will be provided.

The self-study should include at least the following:

Department Profile

  • Mission and goals
  • Program descriptions
  • Degrees offered; undergraduate and graduate
  • Alignment of programs and degrees with department mission
  • Support function or interaction with programs
  • Outreach efforts


  • Headcount and full-time equivalent faculty
  • Faculty profiles (include faculty CVs in an appendix)
  • Faculty teaching loads
  • Faculty research and scholarly productivity
  • Adjunct faculty and graduate assistants FTE
  • Faculty-student ratios
  • Faculty credentials, rank, and diversity information
  • Student credit hours produced per full-time equivalent faculty



  • Admission standards
  • Student credit hours generated
  • Number of majors in program
  • Enrollment and attrition trends
  • Transfer data
  • Graduation and retention rates
  • Student placement rates and salary data if available

Program Cost

  • Instructional costs
  • Support costs

Program Support

  • Facilities and equipment
  • Professional development

Program Assessment

  • Examples of goals, measurements, and impact
  • Evidence of ongoing and systemic documentation of student learning in courses, programs and degrees
  • Evidence the assessment data are collected, analyzed and used for improvements
  • Strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations

3. The Review Committee

The Review Committee will consist of at least two external reviewers with expertise in the discipline and one internal reviewer not affiliated with the program. The Associate Dean will forward recommendations of review committee members to the Dean for approval. Review committee members will not have close personal or working ties to department faculty members.

Review Committee Responsibilities:

  1. Read and evaluate the department self-study.

  2. Spend at least two days on campus meeting with department faculty, students, staff, administration, the dean, and others deemed necessary to make a thorough assessment of the department.

  3. Make comparative judgments between SLCC and peer institutions relating to the department's curriculum, faculty, students, administration, and program resources,

  4. Submit a report to the department within six weeks of the visit to campus.

Review Committee members will analyze the department self-study and additional data gathered and create a report with recommendations related to program improvement, continuation or discontinuation. The Review Committee will submit their report to the department and Dean.

The department is responsible to formulate a plan of action to address the Review Committee’s assessment, including necessary actions to take prior to next 5-year review. This plan of action is submitted to the Dean for his/her formal response.

4. Program Review Preparation and Submission

Following completion of his/her official response, the Dean submits (1) the program Self Study, (2) Review Committee's final report, (3) completed data table, and (4) response to the Provost's Office (copy the Curriculum Office). Additional recommendations and response will be included by the Provost and his staff. The Provost's Office presents the complete program review to the Executive Cabinet, SLCC Board of Trustees, and USHE Board of Regents.

October Instructional Program review schedule submitted to USHE
First week of March Curriculum office notifies Deans & Associate Deans and provides instruction and templates
  Self-study completed and submitted to Dean with recommendations for Review Committee members
  Program visits by Review Committee
June 1 Report from Review Committee submitted to program & Dean for comments
Late June Comments on the report returned to Review Committee
July 15 Final Review Committee Report submitted to Dean
Aug 31 Dean submits review to Provost’s Office
September Provost presents review to Cabinet and Board of Trustees
October Provost submits to USHE Board of Regents
  Deans & Departments prepare informed budget requests

For more information on instructional program review, please contact the Curriculum & Articulation Office.