Purpose — Program Review

Pro­gram feed­back and review of cur­ricu­lum and learn­ing design will be under­tak­en by an updat­ed pol­i­cy (June 2022) Pro­gram Review Pol­i­cy 3–11. The Cen­tre for Teach­ing and Learn­ing Inno­va­tion sup­ports this process which will engage all cre­den­tialed pro­grams at North Island Col­lege every sev­en years into a cur­ricu­lum renew­al and pro­gram review process.

• NOTE: For all the forms, tem­plates, guides and exem­plars along with video tuto­ri­als and hand­outs — go to Share­Point Team Sites (via MyN­IC) and locate NIC Pro­gram Review Process!
• For the lat­est sched­ule of pro­grams engag­ing in the process: Link to Sched­ule

What is Program Review?

Pro­gram Review is a fac­ul­ty-led ongo­ing and sys­tem­at­ic inquiry process where­by key stu­dent learn­ing expe­ri­ence stake­hold­ers reflect on the strengths of edu­ca­tion­al pro­grams and iden­ti­fy areas for enhance­ment. The process of pro­gram review engages all par­tic­i­pants in an evi­dence-based assess­ment of how well pro­grams and depart­ments are pro­vid­ing the best pos­si­ble expe­ri­ence for stu­dent learn­ing. The process is part of an ongo­ing cur­ricu­lum renew­al and review process.

Like all BC post-sec­ondary insti­tu­tions, North Island Col­lege is required by the Col­lege and Insti­tutes Act to review pro­grams and report out on them on a reg­u­lar basis. The College’s Pro­gram Review Pol­i­cy # 3–11 defines the process of pro­gram review at NIC: NIC Pol­i­cy #3–11. The Vice-Pres­i­dent, Aca­d­e­m­ic (VPA) over­sees the pro­gram review process at NIC. The VPA estab­lish­es pro­gram review groups and annu­al­ly, through con­sul­ta­tions, pro­duces the sched­ule. Pro­grams progress through sev­en phas­es of the pro­gram review process with the assis­tance of the Cen­tre for Teach­ing and Learn­ing Inno­va­tion (CTLI).

What is the Purpose of Program Review?

Pro­gram review is a sys­tem­at­ic evi­dence-based assess­ment of how well NIC pro­grams are pro­vid­ing the best pos­si­ble stu­dent learn­ing expe­ri­ences. Indi­vid­ual pro­gram review rec­om­men­da­tions and action plans inform Col­lege-wide plan­ning efforts, depart­ment lev­el mul­ti-year pro­gram plans, and course and pro­gram devel­op­ment and revi­sion.

Pro­gram Review is led by instruc­tors employed in the pro­gram group­ing under­go­ing review in col­lab­o­ra­tion with the dean who directs the process. The pur­pose is to rec­om­mend future direc­tion and changes through exam­i­na­tion of the cur­rent state of a pro­gram group’s offer­ings using evi­dence pro­vid­ed by Insti­tu­tion­al Research and through sur­veys and focus groups involv­ing stu­dents, alum­ni, employ­ers where applic­a­ble, an exter­nal eval­u­a­tion team and oth­er stake­hold­ers. Reflec­tion by fac­ul­ty and staff on the infor­ma­tion gath­ered, devel­op­ments in each teach­ing area, ped­a­gog­i­cal con­sid­er­a­tions, deliv­ery meth­ods and over­all strengths and chal­lenges is crit­i­cal to a suc­cess­ful review.

The fol­low­ing cri­te­ria for pro­gram review are out­lined in Qual­i­ty Assur­ance Process Audit (QAPA) of the the Min­istry of Post-Sec­ondary Edu­ca­tion and Future Skills. These cri­te­ria are applic­a­ble, with some adap­ta­tion, to both degree and non-degree pro­gram­ming:

• Align­ment of struc­ture, admis­sion require­ments, method of deliv­ery, and cur­ricu­lum with the program’s learn­ing out­comes and stan­dards;
• Effec­tive use of resources (phys­i­cal, tech­no­log­i­cal, finan­cial and human);
• Qual­i­ty of teach­ing and super­vi­sion and demon­stra­ble cur­ren­cy in the field of spe­cial­iza­tion;
• Coheren­cy of achieved learn­ing out­comes with program’s stat­ed goals, the cre­den­tial lev­el stan­dard, and where appro­pri­ate, the stan­dards of any relat­ed reg­u­la­to­ry, accred­it­ing, or pro­fes­sion­al asso­ci­a­tion;
• Ade­qua­cy of meth­ods used for stu­dent assess­ment and eval­u­a­tion;
• Sat­is­fac­tion of stake­hold­er groups (e.g. cur­rent stu­dents, grad­u­ates, employ­ers, receiv­ing insti­tu­tions)
• Grad­u­ate out­comes (e.g. employ­ment rates, grad­u­a­tion rate)
• Align­ment with and con­tri­bu­tion to insti­tu­tion­al man­date, core val­ues, and objec­tives.

How Does It All Work?

Giv­en the com­plex­i­ty of the tasks and sched­ul­ing each pro­gram review group will require plan­ning meet­ings of all mem­bers to get the most val­ue out of the process. The data gath­er­ing and analy­sis will take a num­ber of months to acquire and digest, reflect upon and then apply to the work of the self-study report. Once the self-study is com­plete with a focus on key rec­om­men­da­tions for improve­ment the report is sent to an exter­nal review team.

Exter­nal review­ers are required for each pro­gram review group­ing.  The exter­nal review team will con­sist of one NIC fac­ul­ty mem­ber with knowl­edge of the pro­gram area under review but who is not a mem­ber of the pro­gram review team and two peers with equiv­a­lent knowl­edge who are not employed by NIC (typ­i­cal­ly from BC insti­tu­tions with lead­er­ship expe­ri­ence in dis­ci­pline).  The exter­nal review team will cre­ate a report of their find­ings and sub­mit to the dean.

Infor­ma­tion emerg­ing from the self-study and exter­nal review report will form the basis for the final report and action plan.

Help with data sourc­ing, and sur­veys and focus groups for stu­dents, alum­ni and oth­er stake­hold­ers will be pro­vid­ed by Insti­tu­tion­al Research through the Direc­tor of the Cen­tre Teach­ing and Learn­ing Innovation’s office.