Program Review may be undertaken for the purposes of improvement or prioritization.

Robert Dickeson (2010) lays out ten criteria for consideration when undertaking program review for meaningful prioritization. These criteria are enumerated below along with guiding questions.

Criterion 1: History, Development and Expectations of the Program

Why was the program established?
What is the program's maturity level How did it start and how did evolve over the years?
What were the original expectations for the program and how have those changed?
How has the program responded to changing demographic characteristics of our students?
How has the program attracted and engaged students?
What other contexts have changed?

Criterion 2: External Demand for the Program

What are national, regional and local enrollment trends for like programs?
Are peer/aspirational institutions maintaining enrollments in similar programs?
What is the likely potential for future enrollments (backed by data)?
What are the characteristics of current and potential students?

Criterion 3: Internal Demand for the Program

What are the enrollments in program courses required by other programs?
What are the enrollment numbers in program courses for major, minor, general education, service or elective purposes?
What other programs are dependent on courses in this program?
Does the program provide services (pedagogical, expertise, or other) needed by other parts of the campus?

Criterion 4: Quality of Program Inputs and Processes

Four input categories within this criterion are (1) faculty and staff, (2) students, (3) curriculum, and (4) adaptability of technology/infrastructure.

What are the qualifications, skills and capacities of program faculty and staff?
How easy is it to recruit and retain faculty?
Is there an appropriate balance of full- and part-time faculty?
How do students in the program compare on admission quality measures?
What is the likelihood of success in this program for students meeting these quality criteria?
Is the curriculum appropriate to provide the skills, attitudes and behaviors necessary to the discipline? Does it promote integration? Does it advance all of the College Competencies? Does the curriculum require (and meet) specialized accreditation?
Is the curriculum dynamic? Has it shifted to meet the changing needs of students? Does it accommodate varied learning styles?
To what degree does the program take advantage of learning technology? What other resources does the program require (equipment, software, space, materials)? Are facilities conducive to quality of the learning experience?

Criterion 5: Quality of Program Outcomes

What examples of exemplary and proficient performance does the program demonstrate?
Do what degree do students meet intended program learning outcomes? College Competencies?
What are the degrees of student satisfaction, alumni satisfaction, and employer satisfaction? What are the career placement data? What is the success rate of professional licensure and certification examinations?
How well do faculty achieve in measures of teaching effectiveness?
What recognition do faculty bring the program in professional or public service? Scholarship? Other recognition?

Criterion 6: Size, Scope and Productivity of the Program

How many students are enrolled? How many are being served?
How are faculty and other resources committed? How many courses are scheduled?
What are the number of credit hours generated? Degrees or certificates awarded?
What are the number of services rendered? Research developed? Creative efforts produced?

Criterion 7: Revenue and Other Resources Generated by the Program

Sources of revenue include:

Enrollments
Services provided to other internal programs (net payer or net receiver)
Research Grants
Fundraising
Grants of equipment or other capital items
Other sources such as fees
Potential revenue such as gifts, bequests

Criterion 8: Costs and Other Expenses Associated with the Program

What are the direct and indirect costs associated with delivering the program?
What demonstrable efficiencies in the way the program is operated are beneficial to the institution?
What investment in new resources are required to maintain or bring the program up to a high level of quality?

Criterion 9: Impact, Justification, and Overall Essentiality of the Program

What impact has this program had and what impact does it promise?
What are the benefits to the institution? How does it promote the college mission?
How essential is the program to the institution? How does it impact the success of other programs?
Does the program serve people in ways that no other program does? Does it respond to a societal need that the institution values?
How does the program help the college differentiate itself? How is it linked to the college's overall strategy?

Criterion 10: Opportunity Analysis of the Program

How does the program seize upon opportunities not yet considered by the college?
What environmental factors afford opportunities that this program can take advantage of?
How could the program change or evolve? Might it be offered in a different way?

AcademicPrioritization

Achieving Strategic Balance

External and internal forces act on the institution.

Achieving balance requires the consideration of twelve dimensions:

Balancing the functions of teaching, research, advising, and service
Balancing institutional purposes
- Preparing students for careers
- Transmitting the civilization
- Teaching how to think
- Liberating the individual
- Teaching values
Managing fiscal expectations
Achieving congruence between goals/priorities and the resources needed to sustain them
Accomplishing affordability and accessibility
Balancing stability and flexibility
Harmonizing institutional interest and public interest
Respecting tradition and readying for the future
Reconciling the competing expectations of stakeholders (students, parents, donors, community, grantors, faculty, staff)
Integrating liberal arts and career preparation
Planning top down and bottom up
Delineating authority and responsibility

Resources for Program Review and Revision

Robert C. Dickeson, Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services: Reallocating Resources to Achieve Strategic Balance, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2010

Dickeson, Chapters 3 & 9: Dickeson_ProgramPrioritization_Chapters3and9_2010.pdf

Dickeson, Program Prioritization Worksheet: Dickeson_ProgramPrioritization_CriteriaWorksheet_2010.pdf