Title: Program Review Policy and Process
Adopted: 11/14/2025
Version: 2.0
Review Cycle: Every two years
Date Last Reviewed: 11/14/2025
Policy Sponsor: Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Provost
Policy Owner: Vice Provost for Academic Strategy & Effectiveness

The University of Michigan-Flint is committed to the continuous improvement of its academic programs to ensure their quality, relevance, and alignment with institutional priorities and societal needs. This commitment is fulfilled through a structured program review process that promotes data-informed decision-making, supports academic planning, and fosters long-term program sustainability.

All undergraduate and graduate degree programs undergo a formal review on a rotating basis. At the heart of this process is a comprehensive self-study conducted by program faculty, designed to reflect critically on program strengths, challenges, and opportunities for improvement.

Definition of Self-Study

For the purposes of this policy, a self-study is a structured document or set of documents that presents a thorough internal assessment of a program.

• For programs with external accreditation, the self-study follows the standards and format defined by the external accrediting agency.
• For programs without external accreditation, the self-study follows the university-provided template.

In both cases, the self-study must address critical areas such as student success, faculty excellence, fiscal sustainability, resources, and alignment with the mission and goals of the academic unit and institution.

The self-study serves as the foundation of the program review process, providing a structured opportunity for faculty to reflect on the effectiveness, quality, and direction of their program. Building on this foundation, the purpose of program review is outlined below.

Purpose

The program review process is a central mechanism for continuous program improvement, designed to ensure the ongoing quality, relevance, and sustainability of all academic programs. Through the creation and subsequent review of the self-study document, the process aims to:

• Determine whether students are achieving desired learning outcomes
• Assess how well the curriculum aligns with disciplinary trends and workforce or graduate study expectations
• Ensure that faculty qualifications, resources, and infrastructure adequately support teaching and scholarship
• Identify strengths, challenges, and strategic opportunities for program enhancement or re-alignment
• Develop evidence-based recommendations for ongoing program improvement and future planning

In short, the goal of program review is to determine whether the program is working well, for whom, and how it can evolve to remain relevant, rigorous, and sustainable.

Audience

This policy applies to all academic units and their associated degree and certificate programs at the University of Michigan–Flint. It serves multiple audiences involved in the program review process, each with distinct yet complementary roles:

• Program Faculty: use this policy to guide the preparation of self-study documents, analyze program effectiveness, and identify areas for improvement.
• Faculty Review Committees: apply the policy’s framework and criteria to evaluate program self-studies, identify strengths and challenges, and develop recommendations.
• Deans and Academic Unit Leadership: use the resulting reports and recommendations to inform discussions with program faculty and to develop formal recommendations to the Provost.
• Provost’s Office and Institutional Leadership: ensure that the program review process aligns with institutional mission, accreditation standards, and strategic goals, and that outcomes of program review inform planning and decision making at the institutional level.

Collectively, these audiences share responsibility for maintaining academic quality, accountability, and continuous improvement through an evidence-based, collaborative review process.

Review Tracks

The following outlines distinguish between externally accredited programs and those without external accreditation. Both tracks follow the same overall review expectations and cycle described in the subsequent Administrative Review and Action section.

Track 1: Externally Accredited Programs

• These programs follow the review schedule, standards, and self-study format required by their accrediting body.
• A copy of the self-study draft must be submitted to the VPA&A as early as possible but no later than two weeks prior to submission to the accreditor, allowing time to provide formative feedback.
  • For programs in which the external accreditor requires the Chancellor to sign the document: in order to give the Chancellor sufficient time for review, a copy of the self-study draft must be submitted to the VPA&A no later than four weeks prior to submission. Subsequently, the self-study document must be finalized no later than two weeks prior to submission.
• A copy of the finalized self-study must be submitted to the VPA&A upon final submission to the external accreditor. The finalized self-study will serve as the basis for institutional review and follow-up through the same process used for Track 2 programs.
• Calendar: the exact sequence of internal and external reviews depends on the deadlines imposed by the external accreditors.

Track 2: Non-Accredited or Non-Certified Programs

• Programs will conduct an internal review every five years, following the schedule/calendar maintained by the Provost’s Office.
• The unit Dean, in consultation with their Executive Committee or leadership team, determines whether an internal committee, external reviewers, or other mechanisms are used.
• A draft self-study is submitted to the VPA&A for feedback prior to finalization. As above, this must be submitted to the VPA&A as early as possible but no later than two weeks prior to its completion.
• A copy of the finalized self-study must be submitted to the VPA&A upon its completion. The finalized self-study will serve as the basis for institutional review and follow-up through the same process used for Track 1 programs.
• Calendar: the yearly deadline for program reviews is May 19; it is expected that the internal review process will be conducted during the spring/summer. Consultation with the UCC or Graduate Board will occur in the following academic year, with final feedback presented at that time.

Administrative Review and Action

The Vice Provost for Assessment and Accreditation (VPA&A) oversees the program review process on behalf of the Provost, ensuring consistent application of university standards and coordination across units.

Following completion of the program self-study, review activities occur collaboratively at both the unit and institutional levels.

• At the Unit level: the Dean consults with the Executive Committee or Leadership Team, program faculty, and – when appropriate – external reviewers. This review focuses on interpreting the self-study findings and identifying priorities for continuous improvement.
• At the institutional level: the VPA&A, acting on behalf of the Provost, reviews all self-study materials, consults with the dean and faculty as needed, and shares preliminary findings with the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee or Graduate Board for faculty input.

Based on these reviews, the VPA&A prepares a summary memorandum that includes:

• Key findings and identified strengths and challenges from the review;
• Recommendations for continuous improvement and future planning; and
• Expectations or timelines for assessing progress on identified priorities.

This memorandum is shared with the Dean, program faculty, and the Provost. The Provost’s Office considers the findings and recommendations within the context of broader institutional planning and may determine subsequent administrative actions as appropriate.

Decisions regarding program continuance, modification, moratorium, or discontinuation remain outside the program review process itself and are determined by the Provost’s Office in accordance with university policy (e.g., SPG 601.02).

Centralized Oversight and Records

On behalf of the Provost’s Office, the VPA&A will maintain a centralized system for tracking program review timelines, self-study documents, recommendations, and follow-up actions.

Outline for Internal Program Review Self-Study Document

1. Executive Summary

• Key findings, highlights, and overarching recommendations.

2. Program Overview

• Program name, degree awarded, modality (or modalities).
• Mission statement and its connection to the unit’s and institution’s mission/strategic plan.
• Brief history, including prior reviews, accreditation reports, or action plans.
• Contributions to other programs and the broader institution.

3. Curriculum and Assessment of Learning Outcomes

• Program goals and objectives.
• Curriculum structure, trends, and recent changes.
• Evidence of student learning assessment (methods, results, and use of results).
• Points of pride and innovations in pedagogy or design.

4. Student Success and Outcomes

• Student profile (enrollment, demographics, pathways).
• Key metrics: retention, graduation, job placement, and graduate school data.
• Use of data to inform program improvements.

5. Faculty

• Faculty roster with ranks and qualifications.
• Teaching effectiveness, curricular/pedagogical innovations.
• Research expertise, scholarly contributions, and professional accomplishments.
• Faculty service and engagement.

6. Resources and Support

• Budget and financial sustainability.
• Facilities, equipment, library, IT, and other resources.
• Faculty–student ratio and staffing.
• Resource needs for program effectiveness.

7. Opportunities and Areas for Growth

• Emerging trends, challenges, and opportunities.
• External demand (labor market, competitor programs, regional needs).
• Community and industry engagement.

8. Strategic Priorities and Next Steps

• Planned curriculum changes or innovations.
• Recruitment and retention strategies for students and faculty.
• Infrastructure or resource development plans.
• Long-term vision for the program.

9. Conclusion

• Integrated analysis of student, faculty, and financial data.
• High-level recommendations and summary of program direction.

10. Supporting Documents

• Student data (enrollment, graduates, job placement, alumni info).
• Advisory board or employer input.
• Policies, handbooks, or departmental reports.
• Meeting minutes or other relevant documentation.

Program Review Criteria

The following criteria provide a framework for evaluating academic programs during the program review process. They are intended to guide faculty committees, academic leaders, and reviewers in assessing program quality, effectiveness, and sustainability. The criteria align with the structure of the self-study outline and emphasize both accountability and continuous improvement. By focusing on mission alignment, curriculum and learning outcomes, student success, faculty excellence, resources, opportunities for growth, and strategic planning, the review process ensures that each program is examined holistically and positioned for future success.

1. Mission and Goals

• Are the program’s goals clearly stated?
• Do they align with the mission and strategic priorities of the academic unit and institution?

2. Curriculum and Assessment of Learning Outcomes

• Is the curriculum current, coherent, and responsive to student and professional needs?
• Are student learning outcomes clearly articulated, systematically assessed, and used to guide program improvements?

3. Student Success and Outcomes

• Are enrollment, retention, and graduation rates appropriate for the program?
• What evidence is available regarding student success after graduation (employment, graduate study, licensure, etc.)?
• How is student success data used to inform program improvements?

4. Faculty Excellence

• Do faculty possess appropriate academic and professional qualifications?
• Are faculty effective in teaching, scholarly or professional contributions, and service to the program and institution?
• Do faculty demonstrate engagement in continuous improvement and support of student learning?

5. Resources and Support

• Does the program have sufficient financial, physical, and technological resources to support its goals?
• Are facilities, equipment, library holdings, and staffing adequate for program effectiveness?
• Is the faculty-student ratio appropriate and sustainable?

6. Opportunities and Areas for Growth

• How is the program addressing external trends, disciplinary developments, or market demands?
• What opportunities exist to strengthen student experiences, partnerships, or distinctive program features?

7. Strategic Priorities and Future Planning

• Does the program have realistic, data-informed plans for the future?
• Are there clear priorities for curriculum development, student recruitment and retention, and faculty growth?
• How will the program measure progress toward its goals?

Related Resources

• SPG 601.02 Policy
• Program Review Schedule

Policy Review

Revision Adopted: November 2025
Next Review: November 2027

Questions?

For questions about this policy, please contact the Vice Provost for Assessment and Accreditation or the Office of the Provost.