Year 1: November - Year 2: February 1

Pre-Plan

The APR process includes a regularly scheduled formal Self-Study conducted by faculty and staff within academic units that promotes candid and open self-examination of a unit's strengths and challenges.

It is highly recommended that academic units begin to prepare to engage in the APR process six months prior to the due date of their Letter of Understanding by forming an APR steering team that will guide and facilitate the APR Self-Study activities. When developing an APR steering team, units should consider including Undergraduate Program Directors, Graduate Program Directors, Unit Assessment Leads, Program Chairs, Associate Deans, and faculty invested in the continuous improvement of unit programs.

The steering team will support the unit’s Self-Study by:

1. Organizing sub-groups of faculty and staff to carry out different requirements of the Self-Study process.
2. Leading faculty in discussions and reflections using the unit’s data to identify the programs’ strengths and challenges.
3. Leading faculty discussions and reflections on the unit’s data related to student learning and assessment.
4. Leading faculty discussions and reflections on student support infrastructure and systems.
5. Leading faculty in discussions and reflections related to the unit’s resources.
6. Leading faculty in discussions and reflections related to future program improvement, planning, and sustainability.
7. Writing the Self-Study report.
8. Organizing and facilitating the external review visit.
9. Synthesizing the external review report recommendations with your Self-Study report as a Memo to the Provost (and CAS Dean where appropriate). This Memo and discussion with [Dean and] the Provost will guide finalization of the Action Plan.
10. Creating the final Action Plan and process for Action Plan monitoring to be carried out between formal Self-Studies.

Deliverable: APR Steering Committee

Year 2: February

Letter of Understanding

The Letter of Understanding (LOU) provides an outline of important dates and deliverables included in the APR process. The LOU gives units a template outlining the themes and questions to be examined as part of the assessment process.

There are three mandatory themes to be included in the APR:

• Address how use of evidence of student learning refines program curriculum and pedagogy (Student Learning and Support)
• Identify evidence for determining strategic issues, recommendations for optimizing resource utilization and requests are used to improve program delivery and sustainability (Strategic Issues, Resources, and Sustainability)
• Provide evidence used to envision future programming changes (Executive Summary)

Units may include additional questions specific to items they wish to explore as part of the Self-Study practice.

Each of the required themes have standardized questions which all units undergoing APR answer using narratives and supporting quantitative data evidence.

Deliverable: Letter of Understanding Template

Year 2: February - December

Self Study

An Academic Program Review (APR) Self-Study is an overall narrative and snapshot of the programs offered by the unit engaged in the APR process. This is an opportunity for the unit to showcase its strengths, challenges, and forecasted growth based on evidence provided in the report. The process of writing the Self-Study is equally important as it can serve as a time for reflection and learning among faculty, staff, and students across the academic programs.

Units can organize their self-study process according to how their unit operates, but please note the following requirements:

1. Clear response to the agreed upon questions posed in the LOU
2. Candid internal, evidence-based inquiry that describes each specified program and analyzes strengths and challenges
3. Presentation of data used to analyze strengths and challenges and support reported findings
4. Description of the process of writing the self-study
   

   The data used as evidence for the foundation of the self-study:

5. Articulation of program learning outcomes and their alignment with institutional mission. For example, the Student Program Learning Outcomes for the unit undergraduate programs should be easily found on the LUC web pages and known to unit faculty.
6. Curriculum alignment matrix (map) illustrating which courses are designed to provide students with the opportunity to meet with program learning outcomes as well as serve as places where evidence of learning can be gathered to assess program learning outcomes https://www.luc.edu/clas/
7. Portfolio of admissions, enrollment and completion data supplied by the Office of Academic Programs and Planning including survey data specific to the unit and its specific undergraduate and graduate programs (to be reviewed at the pre-self-study APR Summit).
8. Findings from the academic units- regularly conducted assessments of student learning outcomes aligned to specific programs.
9. Other data collected over time by the department can also be included, such as instructional costs, certification pass rates, workloads, faculty to student ratios; FT to PT faculty ratios, etc. Throughout the writing of the Self-Study, units can utilize APP Faculty Fellows and workshop materials for feedback, support, and guidance.

Deliverable: Self-Study Report

Self-Study Recommendations and Checklist

Year 2: October - Year 3: February

External Review and Report

The external review process invites qualified leaders in an academic area to provide feedback and guidance surrounding continuous programmatic improvement. The nomination of potential reviewers is initiated by the home unit. Reviewers should have experience with similar academic units as those undergoing the APR process in terms of program offerings, size of student and faculty population, and private university or colleges, particularly those identified as Jesuit institutions.

The list of nominated reviewers is assessed by the Provost, and CAS Dean if appropriate. Following approval, selection of two reviewers available during the same timeframe are coordinated and scheduled by the home academic unit. External reviewers will review the Loyola University Chicago Self-Study report and attend a 2-day site visit to the respective campus of the academic unit.

While at Loyola University Chicago, external reviewers will meet with groups that are invested in the improvement process of the academic unit, including administration, faculty, students (current and former), or external partners, over the course of two days. Reviewers will be given several questions the unit and University want addressed. A summation of their findings will be included in a ten-page report, used to stimulate strategic planning to cultivate the home unit's operation.

Questions addressed by external reviewers in their report should include:

• A brief overview that addresses the key facets of the unit and programs and addresses strategic issues that are a focus of the Academic Program Review.
• Views on unit’s Program Learning Outcomes
• What has the department been doing well? What evidence supports this conclusion?
• What could the department do to improve? What evidence supports this conclusion?
• What should the department do that it is not currently doing? What evidence supports this conclusion?
• What should the department stop doing that it is currently doing? What evidence supports this conclusion?
• What next short and long-term steps do you recommend the unit take and why? Please also share any other observations and/or suggested actions to support continuous improvement in these academic programs that arose from the Academic Program Review.
• What resources might be reallocated within the unit to meet these priorities? What resources would be vital to attain the top priorities, if available? What policies or practices should be changed to support any planned improvements and/or recommendations?

Deliverables: External Reviewers approved October; site visits Jan/Feb; Reports end of February

External Reviewers Nomination Form

Year 3: March

Memos

After receipt of the External Review Report (ERR), the APR team will share the ERR with the academic unit and appropriate administration (e.g., Provost, College of Arts & Sciences (CAS) Dean, Graduate School Dean). Units will then draft a Memo using their Self-Study and external review to identify objectives or actions that are a priority as well as respond to any concerns from the external review.

Non-CAS units will submit their Memo to the APR team, who will share it with the Provost and Vice Provost for Graduate Education, if appropriate. The APR team will schedule a meeting with the Unit, APR team, Provost and Vice Provost for Graduate Education, if appropriate, to discuss the Memo, and receive feedback on the actions/objectives proposed in the Memo. Units can prepare a draft Action Plan prior to this meeting to share the three to five selected objectives.

Units within the CAS will submit their Memo to the APR team, who will share it with the CAS Dean, Provost, and Graduate School Dean, if appropriate. The CAS Deans’ Office will schedule an appointment to meet with the Unit’s Chairperson and others as appropriate, to discuss the Memo and provide feedback on the actions/objectives proposed in it. Based on the discussion the CAS Dean will submit a Deans’ Memo to the APR team, Unit and Provost. The APR team will schedule a meeting with the Unit, APR team, CAS Dean, Provost and Graduate School Dean, if appropriate, to discuss the Memos and provide feedback on the proposed actions/objectives. Units can prepare a draft Action Plan prior to this meeting to share the three to five selected objectives.

Deliverables: College of Arts & Sciences Memo Template or Non-CAS Department/School Memo Template,  Deans' Memo Template

Year 3: March - April

Action Planning

Units can use their Self-Study, external review report, and Memo to create a draft Action Plan for the meeting with the Provost. During the Provost meetings, the unit can present their draft and discuss the Action Plan and receive feedback. Units will then submit a finalized Action Plan to the APR team within two weeks of their meeting with the Provost. The finalized Action Plan will be shared with the Deans and/or Provost for approval.

Based on what units have learned and discussed as part of their formal APR Self-Study process, units develop an Action Plan that presents concrete steps the unit will take to make improvements.

Unit Action Plans must include the following:

• Three to five specific objectives units plan to accomplish, with at least one objective addressing each of the following broad areas:
  • Student learning and success
  • Resource effectiveness
  • Size/type of programs.
• Critical activities needed to meet each objective, including who in the unit (or outside) is responsible for leading activity, including the timeline for activity implementation,
• Specific benchmarks to be achieved at given times, for each critical activity
• What deliverables will show progress is being made in the short term (one to two years) and long term (four to five years)
• A timeline and plan to assess the effectiveness of the deliverable. (e.g., in a Monitoring Report, next APR cycle, in an annual assessment process)
• A brief narrative explains the selected objectives and how benchmarks will indicate progress on them.

Deliverable: Action Plan Template

Year 4: May*

Action Plan Monitoring

Units in the monitoring phase of the APR process submit an annual progress report on their Action Plan to the APR Team. Monitoring Reports are due the 1st of May of the year following their Action Plan meeting, and every May 1st following that, until they begin the APR cycle anew. Monitoring Reports from CAS units are shared with the Dean of CAS, and reports from non-CAS units are shared with the Provost. During the May monthly 1:1 meeting with the Provost, Deans of non-CAS units will discuss the Monitoring Report and progress on the Action Plan with the Provost. The Provost will provide feedback on the academic unit’s progress. During the May monthly 1:1 meeting between the CAS Dean and Chairs of CAS, units will discuss the Monitoring Report and progress on Action Plan with the CAS Dean. The CAS Dean will provide feedback on the academic unit’s progress. Any changes to objectives or addition of objectives should be documented and sent to the APP team. During the June CAS Dean and Provost 1:1 meeting, the CAS Dean will discuss the progress of CAS units with the Provost and the Provost will provide feedback.

Deliverable: Interim Monitoring Report Template