A self-study is produced by a program review team within the department, working with the chair and the entire department. The self-study is based on data about the program and is normally drafted by multiple team members during a spring semester and compiled/edited by the team coordinator in the summer after the five-year period of study. The self-study is an inward focused process and should include:
- A review and report on progress made on any existing programmatic goals, including those from the previous program review;
- Exploration of the relationship between the program’s mission, philosophy, co-curriculum, activities, and goals (et al.) with Truman’s vision, liberal arts and sciences mission, Strategic Plan, and campus-wide initiatives (e.g., Critical Thinking, Transformative Experiences).
- Exploration of program-level outcomes, course-level outcomes, and a corresponding curriculum map showing the relationship across program-level, course-level, and university-wide outcomes (See Appendix Z of this document).
- Examination of the program’s performance metrics and University-wide indicators of program success (e.g., graduation rate), and state-wide indicators such as those used for performance funding.
- Documentation of the programmatic discussions that took place among stakeholders regarding the curriculum, learning outcomes; assessment of learning outcomes; co-curriculum, activities, program quality; performance metrics, and key issues concerning the mission of the program.
- Based on the explorations and examinations above, identification of programmatic strengths, areas in need of improvement, potential opportunities, and current or potential areas of concern;
- An attainable plan of action (goals) for the next five years. What are the compelling curricular and programmatic developments that will be pursued, given current fiscal realities? How will the program continue to evolve in accommodating changing student needs and in continuing forward programmatic progress? How can the program increasingly capitalize on its strengths while addressing areas that are in need of improvement? The plan should include attainable goals that will allow progress to be reflected upon and reported at the next five-year review.
- Appendices:
- Standard data elements provided by Academic Affairs
- Current CVs of faculty members should be filed electronically with the school and made available for reviewers (Using Digital Measures).
- Course-level Syllabi should be filed electronically with the school and made available for reviewers.
- Elements requested by Faculty Senate, if not included elsewhere.
- A review of the program and the self-study, from outside the department. This review is performed by two or more reviewers, at least one of whom is a faculty member from another Truman School, and one of whom is an external reviewer from an institution with characteristics similar to Truman. Additional reviewers may be requested for departments with multiple programs or to ensure that multiple “angles” are appropriately covered. External reviewers must be approved by the Chair, Dean, and VPAA and arrangements for the official visit are coordinated by the Department and School working with the Academic Affairs Office.
- A Memo by the Dean, highlighting key areas for improvement and campus support for future improvements to the program. The Dean should verify that CVs and Course-level Syllabi are up-to-date and readily available.
- A response by the department to the review and memos, highlighting any changes to the action plan as a result of the additional feedback.
- An Executive Summary (5-8 pages) for easy review by governance and other campus and public audiences composed of key elements of the above documents.