General Statement of Purpose of MSU’s Program Review: “The purpose of program/unit review at Missouri State University is to allow the members of a department and administration to continuously gauge the effectiveness and efficiency of its academic programs. By systematically reviewing mission, goals, priorities, activities, and outcomes, the desired result is continuous improvements in the quality of teaching and learning, research, and public service.” Provost Program Review Process
Libraries Review Process
Programs are reviewed every five years The first year of the five-year cycle involves an intensive process of self-study, external review, and the creation of a four-year strategic plan. The intensive first-year program review process occurs during the normal academic year, from approx. August 15 through May 15.
- The fall semester is the self-study phase of program review, where data are gathered and analyzed, current and emerging better practices at other academic libraries and in other fields of endeavor are studied, and a detailed self-study and draft 4-year strategic plan for the program under review are created and distributed for review and comment.
- During the spring semester the external reviewer(s) visit campus, study the program, the self-study, and the draft strategic plan, then submit an external review report with recommendations. Near the end of the spring semester the 4-year strategic plan is finalized.
- Why does this program exist?
- What needs are being filled by the program?
- How do the program providers know the characteristics of the needs the program is filling?
- How are those needs changing over time? (If there are any immutable constants related to the program being reviewed, they should be stated here.)
- Historically, how has the program met those needs? (Try to focus on outcomes and impacts, not on inputs.)
- How are program outcomes and impacts measured and documented?
- What are the core and penumbral user groups for this program?
- What cognitive and affective feedback about the program have been received (e.g., user satisfaction surveys)?
- What are the current and emerging better theories and practices (technological innovation falls under the general rubric of "practices") related to the program being reviewed?
- How can the program be improved to meet the changing needs and expectations of core, penumbral, and potential users of the program, in light of emerging better theories and practices?
Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) Standards for Libraries in Higher Education
Note: The beginning fiscal year of this two-year program review process is listed below.