OFFICE OF THE PROVOST AND EXECUTIVE VICE CHANCELLOR 5200 N. LAKE ROAD MERCED, CA 95343
June 3, 2014
TO: IGNACIO LOPEZ-‐‑CALVO CHAIR, ACADEMIC SENATE
FROM: THOMAS W. PETERSON, PROVOST AND EVC
RE: PERIODIC REVIEW OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (PROC) CHARGE
I have read and reviewed the proposed charge for the Periodic Review Oversight Committee (PROC). The proposed charge has also been reviewed and approved by the Vice Chancellors and Deans.
I approve the implementation of the new charge and the formation of the Periodic Review Oversight Committee. My office will begin the appointment process for the administrative members over the summer.
CC: Susan Sims, Chief of Staff, Office of the Provost Laura Martin, Coordinator of Institutional Assessment Dejeune Shelton, Director, Academic Senate
OFFICE OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, MERCED
IGNACIO LÓPEZ-CALVO, CHAIR 5200 NORTH LAKE ROAD
email@example.com MERCED, CA 95343
(209) 228-7954; fax (209) 228-7955
May 15, 2013
Provost/EVC Thomas W. Peterson
RE: Periodic Review Oversight Committee (PROC)
Please find attached for your consideration the draft Periodic Review Oversight Committee (PROC) charge and new program review process recently approved by the Undergraduate and Graduate Council’s, and endorsed by Division Council.
For your reference I have also attached a memo from Undergraduate Council Chair Sharping, Graduate Council Chair Leppert, and Program Review Chair Camfield explaining the proposed revisions to UC Merced Academic Program Review and revised Undergraduate and Graduate policies.
We are seeking your approval of the PROC charge and new process with the hope of finalizing the charge as soon as possible.
Ignacio López-Calvo, Chair Division Council
CC: Division Council
A joint committee of the Senate and Administration, the Periodic Review Oversight Committee supports and advances UC Merced’s educational and institutional effectiveness and organizational learning through its campus-‐wide advisory and oversight responsibilities for academic and administrative assessment, both periodic and annual.
Specifically, the Committee
- Oversees and coordinates periodic peer-‐based program review for the Academic Senate and the Administration, as per current
- Oversees administrative periodic review, as per current
- Facilitates the alignment of resources and the academic mission and campus strategic plans by identifying and recommending to the Academic Senate and the Administration opportunities and mechanisms to support resource alignment and the integration/coordination of administrative and academic periodic peer-‐based program
- Identifies and recommends to program faculty, Academic Senate and Administration, strategies to develop and sustain a system of institutional assessment practices, including workflow and assessment support, that seeks to increase program review/assessment efficiency, including streamlining various review processes (e.g. WASC, Periodic Peer-‐based Academic Program Review, ABET).
- Recommends to the Academic Senate and Administration strategies to address accreditation expectations related to assessment, annual and
- On an annual basis, reviews and reports on the alignment of institutional operations with campus mission and strategic goals, as evidenced by the aggregate results of periodic program reviews and annual assessment
- Periodically reviews the program review process to ensure it is achieving its intended purposes, recommending to the Senate and Administration improvements to practice and policy as
- Recommends to the Academic Senate and Administration, the charge and composition of other committees that have regular or periodic responsibility for
In conducting its work, the Committee
- Recognizes that periodic reviews of academic programs are conducted under the authority of the Standing Orders of the University of California, the University of California Academic Senate, and the Merced Divisional Bylaws (specifically bylaws 3.B.5 and IV.2.B.6).
- Supports the campus’ assessment-‐related aspirations as outlined in the UC Merced Principles of Assessment.
- Recognizes that reviews of new academic program proposals are not under the purview of the committee, but are conducted under a separate set of Senate and Administration policies and
Program Review Manager (non-‐member; Office of Institutional Assessment)
The committee will be co-‐chaired by the Vice Chair of the Divisional Council and the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor.
For the committee to be convened, a minimum of three of six designated faculty seats must be filled to establish a “working representation” of faculty.
A vote requires a balanced representation of the Academic Senate and the Administration. A majority of members present at the meeting constitutes a quorum. In the absence of a quorum the Council may discuss business and vote on action items electronically.
The committee will generate an annual report.