Site Index

Program Review and Redirection

Distributed and discussed at the Faculty Senate meeting, October 20, 2003

Healthy institutions find it prudent from time to time to review programs to ensure that they are performing at levels appropriate to expectations. Such reviews are urgent in the current funding environment for higher education, when state support is declining even as societal demand for high-quality higher education increases. The University of Tennessee has many excellent programs, and many more that are capable of excellence. But it also has some programs that are less competitive.

Accordingly, we have decided to proceed with a special review of some relatively uncompetitive programs. If the outcome of the review warrants it, we will redirect resources to areas that have a higher probability of achieving excellence. We will use the following process.

• The Council of Deans and the Chancellor's Office will identify a relatively short list of programs to be considered for review, and will constitute a Review and Redirection Task Force (RRTF) by mid-October, 2003.
  
  
• The RRTF will review the initial list using information drawn from the University's regular program reviews, the Delaware study, APEC recommendations, and other institutional data sources. A final list for full consideration will be made public by mid-November.
  
  
• Open hearings for each program will be held thereafter. Participants will include the RRTF; faculty, students and staff from the affected programs; University administrators; the Faculty Senate Education Policy Committee; and other interested parties. By the end of February 2004, the Task Force will forward a list of recommendations to the Senate Graduate and Undergraduate Councils, together with all supporting data and recommendations from the Education Policy Committee.
  
  
• The Graduate and Undergraduate Councils will forward their recommendations to the full Senate by the end of March 2004. The Senate will consider the recommendations at its May 3, 2004 meeting and forward its recommendations to the Chancellor. The Chancellor will deliver his recommendations to the Board of Trustees for action at the June 2004 Board meeting.
  
  
• Faculty in programs recommended for redirection will have all rights described in the Faculty Handbook, Appendix 6, Part 12. The institution will do all it can to reassign staff from programs that are eliminated.
  
  
• The sequence for program redirection will be:
  • Cease admitting students into the program
  • Cease hiring new faculty
  • Initiate process to terminate probationary faculty
  • Reassign or release tenured faculty
  • Notify THEC and accrediting agencies of program elimination

For purposes of this review, "program" is defined broadly to include undergraduate majors, minors, and concentrations (see the 2002-2003 Undergraduate Catalog, pp. 32-35), and graduate majors and degree programs (see the 2002-2003 Graduate Catalog, pp. 10-13). Research centers and institutes are also included in this definition.

Quality: Quality is defined by externally (outside the unit) validated criteria. A "quality" program ranks high in a significant number of the indicators detailed below:

Students

• Placement and employment status
• Outcomes assessment (teaching, advising, GREs, etc.)
• Input indicators (ACT scores, high school rank, merit scholarships)
• Awards (prestigious post-graduate fellowships)

Faculty

• Teaching awards
• Scholarship and artistry
• Contracts and grants
• Awards and recognitions
• Adequacy of the faculty to support the program

Program Reputation

• Rankings
• Other peer recognition
• Accreditation
• Philanthropic support
• Public image

Other Indicators

• Facilities and laboratories
• Quality of library support
• Economic impact
• Engagement with the community
• Adequacy of staff support

Centrality to the mission of the University: the University is a comprehensive, research-extensive, land-grant institution. Programs are essential to the University if they:

• Have enduring academic value
• Have been mandated by federal or state legislation
• Prepare students for effective citizenship in a representative democracy
• Are core disciplines
• Provide comprehensive educational, research, and service opportunities

Uniqueness and Competitive Advantage

• The program or service is not available elsewhere in the state or region and meets particular needs
• There is a distinct audience for the program
• The program differentiates and distinguishes the University
• The program has the ability to draw new resources to the institution

Demand/Need

• The program meets societal needs (such as trained professionals, new knowledge, solutions to complex problems, preparation for citizenship)
• There is strong student demand (majors, student credit hour production, graduates)
• The program is central to general education
• There is a current or perceived future desire/demand for a program or service to meet a societal need
• The integrity of the University would be compromised if the program were to be eliminated

Cost/Benefit

• What does it cost to operate the program? (Space, human resources, operating support, technology, etc.)
• What are the benefits--the perceived or real value received in exchange for the costs? Considerations include institutional reputation, engagement with society, revenue (tuition and fees, contracts and grants, F&A, support of graduate students), contributions to society (research, service, engagement).
• Is the program efficient and effective? Accountable?
• What would be the costs to the institution if the program were eliminated?

Anne Mayhew, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Dean of Graduate Studies (Chair)
Carol Harden, Professor of Geography
Billie Collier, Associate Vice President for Research
Clif Woods, Vice Chancellor for Research
Denise Barlow, Director for Budget and Finance
Ray Hamilton, Executive Director, Budget and Finance
Don Scroggins, Director, Institutional Research and Assessment
Alan Chesney, Executive Director, Human Resources
Beauvais Lyons, President, Faculty Senate
Lou Gross, Chair, Senate Budget Committee
Carol Tenopir, Professor, Information Sciences
Karen Sowers, Dean, College of Social Work
Tom Galligan, Dean, College of Law
John Zomchick, Head, Department of English
Samir El Ghazaly, Head, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Sarah Keeton, President, SGA
Patrick Schuneman, President, Graduate Student Senate