Policy Statement

Purpose

Related Policies and Guidelines

Definitions

Principles

Procedures and Guidelines

Policy Statement:

Douglas College is committed to excellence in providing education and services for its students. Systematic, formal and timely review of programs and services ensure that they meet expectations for excellence.  Annual reviews inform tactical planning processes, enrolment management activities, and assessments of risk.

Purpose:

• The College, as an accountable public institution, has a responsibility to demonstrate to students, government and other stakeholders that effective quality assurance measures are in place.  Program and service reviews provide opportunities to evaluate program and service quality and operational effectiveness.  Reviews also may inform changes to programs and services.
• Program and service Review:
  • Communicate accomplishments;
  • Identify and provide opportunities for improvement;
  • Assess curricular and service rigor;
  • Assure currency;
  • Inform planning;
  • Provide public accountabilty;
  • Provide a formal avenue to identify risks and corresponding mitigation strategies.

Related Policies and Guidelines:

Douglas College Board Policy B01.01.03 (Douglas College Goals)

Guide to Service Review

Comprehensive Program Review Guide

Definitions:

  I.   Scope

A.   Program

Programs are coordinated instructional activities

B.   Service

Service activities occur outside formal courses.  Beneficiaries may be students (e.g. those served by the Registrar's Office) or employees (e.g. those served by the Payroll Department.)

C.   Continuing education and contract training (The Training Group) programs and services are included in          this policy.

   II.   Types of Review

          A.   Annual Reviews

                     The annual review serves as a check-up on a variety of success indicators relating to:  

• Inputs (e.g., student applications or resource allocations);
• Processes (e.g., activity levels and success rates);
• Outcomes (e.g., graduation rates, student/client satisfaction ratings, student participation in the labour force or further education).

Annual reviews are intended to be thorough but not labour intensive.  They are formative in nature, but may lead to a comprehensive review if major issues are identified.

         B.   Comprehensive Reviews

Comprehensive reviews are in-depth assessments of department/program goals, processes, and outcomes.  They include consideration of operational issues and outcomes (see below for more detailed information about Program Review Content and Service Review Content).  The findings and recommendations serve as a framework for program or service renewal, planning and purposeful change.

Regularly scheduled comprehensive reviews are done every five to seven (5-7) years.

A comprehensive review may also be scheduled earlier on the basis of evidence and/or trends that suggest major changes in service, or content delivery need to be addressed. 

Examples of evidence that may trigger an early review of a program include:

• Major enrolment deficits;
• Major Advisory Committee recommendations;
• Major changes in the employment field or labour market for graduates or articulation with other institutions; and
• Changing college priorities that affect one or more programs.

Examples of evidence that may trigger an early review of a service include:

• Large backlogs in work;
• Unusual resource and infrastructure challenges such as high staff turnover; and
• Changing college priorities that affect one or more services.

Comprehensive reviews conducted on an as-needed basis are summative in nature.

Principles Governing Reviews:

Program and service development, implementation and review are based on the mission, goals, and values of Douglas College, as well as the College's Strategic Plan.  The principles for program and service review are as follows:

• Reviews contribute to a culture of self-reflection and research-based practice.  They are an opportunity for programs and services to examine and reflect on practices in a thoughtful and objective manner, based on several sources of information.  The goal of the review is to develop information for improvement.
• Recommendations are used for planning, goal setting and decision-making.  The review contributes to purposeful change and informs operational decision-making.
• Program and service reviews are just one form of evaluation, intended to draw upon and support other processes such as accreditation and curriculum review.  These other forms of evaluation do not negate the need for program and service review, but a particular review may be dramatically reduced in scope because information from these other sources can be used in the review.
• Systems of program and service review are adaptable but will follow a similar structure. Questions common to all programs/services and questions specific to the area are considered. The needs and circumstances of each area are taken into account in designing review methodology.
• Students, faculty, staff, alumni, community, business, industry, governments, and other stakeholders and external experts are involved as appropriate and consulted as required.  Quantitative and qualitative data should be gathered and analyzed during the review process.
• Reviews are intended to be conducted relatively quickly with sufficient data of sufficient quality to reach defensible recommendations. 
• Reviews do not examine the performance of individuals employees.
• Reviews proceed in a transparent manner.  The review schedule and summary of results from regularly scheduled comprehensive reviews are posted on the College website.  Findings and the full report are made available to appropriate audiences.
• Reviews result in recommendations, not decisions.  The implementation of these recommendations must be approved through regular decision-making processes within the College.

Procedures and Guidelines:

General

• The responsibility for ensuring that each program or service is reviewed annually and then comprehensively every 5-7 years, according to a divisional schedule, rests with the Dean, Director or Associate Vice President of the area.  The appropriate administrator will consult with Chairs, Coordinators, Managers and/or Supervisors.
• Programs that are subject to external accreditation reviews will have external review cycles taken into account.
• Operational support for program reviews will be provided by the Centre of Academic and Faculty Development.
• The Institutional Research and Planning Office supports the review process by providing some of the data needed for program and service reviews.

Annual Reviews

• Annual reviews are conducted and completed by each program and service area prior to the end of the academic year, using consistent reporting tools.  The responsibility for ensuring the annual review occurs is that of the Chair/Coordinator/Director of the program/department.  The annual review of data and existing information is part of the ongoing management of the program/service.

Annual reviews are summarized in a report.  The report should address achievements related to the goals/objectives/tactical plans of the previous year.  In addition, the report should summarize data and inform the following year's goals/objectives/tactical plans.

• Members of the program/department/discipline are included in the review process.
• The review results and recommendations are communicated to the Dean/Director/Associate Vice President.  He or she reviews the results and recommendations, and then conveys these to their Vice President/President.  The report is maintained in the Office of the Dean/Director/Associate Vice President for a minimum of five years.

Comprehensive Reviews

Scheduling

• Regularly scheduled comprehensive reviews are conducted every five to seven years.  A Program Review Schedule is established by the Vice President - Academic.  Service Review Schedules are established and maintained by appropriate Vice President or Associate Vice President, in consultation with directors.  Schedules are reviewed annually by Senior Management Team.
• Whereas annual reviews are generally conducted at the departmental or discipline level, comprehensive reviews are sometimes conducted across groups of related departments or disciplines.
• The decision to undertake a comprehensive review outside of the regular schedule, and triggered by major changes in circumstances as outlined in the Definitions section of this policy, is made by the appropriate Vice President or Associate Vice President in consultation with Senior Management Team.

Process

• Regularly-scheduled comprehensive reviews are conducted by a review team appointed by the Dean/Director in consultation with Chairs, Coordinators, Faculty/Department Education Committees, Managers, Supervisors and the appropriate Vice President/Associate Vice President.  The scope, timeline, process and methodology of the review must be approved by the appropriate Vice President or Associate Vice President.
• Reviews outside of the regular schedule and triggered by the need for major changes in content or delivery may be conducted by a committee or individual, appointed by the appropriate Vice President or Associate Vice President.  The Vice President or Associate Vice President also sets the scope, process, and timeline for the review. 
• Relevant stakeholders, both internal and external, are consulted as part of the review process, e.g. advisory committees, accrediting bodies, professional associations, current students, graduates, other College departments or disciplines, and employers.
• In addition to drawing from readily available data and information sources, customized information may need to be developed, sometimes with the assistance of the Office of Institutional Research and Planning.
• Results and outcomes are analyzed and a brief report, with recommendations and a proposed Implementation Plan is produced by the review team.  The Report will include the names of those involved in the review.  After the review, the report is provided to the appropriate Dean/Director.  He or she provides the report to the appropriate Vice President or Associate Vice President.  The report is reviewed for implications by the appropriate administrative and academic bodies such as Education Council and/or the Senior Management Team.  Where appropriate, recommendations will be incorporated into tactical and budgetary planning.
• Where recommendations include changes as described under Board Policy B01.00.01, (Planned Changes to the Organization, Structure and Operation of Educational Programs and Services) the President will present the report and recommendations for changes to the College Board.
• The appropriate Dean/Director work with the Vice President or Associate Vice President to ensure that a follow-up plan is developed and used as part of the next annual review.  The review report and follow-up plan are kept by the appropriate Vice President/Associate Vice President for a minimum of 10 years.

Program Review Content

• The content of a review should be meaningful to the program/discipline, reasonable in scope, and contribute to purposeful and positive change.
• Guidelines will be provided to assist the Review Team.
• The review will examine all of the following:
  • Program Content/Curriculum
  • Pathways
  • Admissions
  • Enrolments/FTE
  • Program Costs
  • Program Operations
  • Program Delivery
  • Faculty Development
  • Student Outcomes
  • Risks

Service Review Content

• The diversity of College services necessitates service reviews to be more customized than program reviews.  Service reviews include consideration of such topics as:

  • The service's mission and philosophy;

  • Service standards;

  • Goal achievement;

  • Student/client impact and satisfaction;

  • Resources requirements and usage;

  • Contributions to student learning and support of curricular delivery;

  • Consistency with Douglas College goals and priorities.

• Service reviews employ quantitative and qualitative methods to assure services are meeting the needs of students and/or clients, as well as meeting College strategic directions.  Multiple modes of assessment are used when possible.
• When available, regional, national or international standards are used for benchmarking purposes.