Academic Program Review

NSU encourages the creation of new and innovative academic programs aligned with its mission. The New Program Review Committee (NPRC) supports academic units in developing proposals. This committee ensures orderly university growth and increases the success potential of proposed programs. It's the only process approved by the Board of Trustees for new academic programs.

• Committee Members
• Budget for Graduate Proposed Programs
• Budget for Undergraduate Proposed Programs (Draft)
• Gainful Employment Form
• Guidelines for Proposed Degree Programs
• Guidelines for Ph.D. Programs
• New Degree Program Proposal Template
• New Certificate Program Request Guidelines
• New Program Review Signature Contacts
• NSU Theses Dissertations Agreement
• NSU Credit Hour Policy
  
• Proposal Review Form

After new program approval and before Academic Review, the Initial Program Review (IPR) takes place, usually one to two years post-launch. The purpose is to evaluate whether the approved program proposal has been implemented as planned.

ASLO engages academic departments in evaluating student learning outcomes for majors offered. It aims to demonstrate achievement, improve teaching quality, and enhance student learning. All academic units participate in this process coordinated by the Office of Academic Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation.

Explore our Resources:

• ASLO Template 
• Sample ASLO Report - M.S. Developmental Disabilities
• ASLO Rating Sheet
• Assessment Plan Template
• Sample Assessment Plan  - B.S. Computer Science
• Sample Assessment Plan  - M.S. Speech Language Pathology
• NSU Program Assessment Model

The Internal Review Committee (IRC) generates evaluative reports for each program under review, providing recommendations for improvement.

• Internal Review Committee Guidelines
• Internal Review Committee Report Template

External Consultants (ECs) are specialists in the field under review, recognized as authorities in their respective areas. Designated ECs will assess each program and provide the President and the Academic Review Committee with a written evaluation of both the program and the Internal Review Committee report.

The Academic Review Committee (ARC) is an enduring university committee consisting of faculty members appointed by the President and reporting directly to them. Membership recommendations are sourced from various channels, including academic deans, faculty, and university administrators, and are formally appointed by the President and Provost.

• Academic Review Committee Members
• ARC Summary of Recommendations Rubric
• ARC Subcommittee Guidelines
• ARC Summary of Recommendations Template

In the Executive Review, the President, Provost, Associate Provost, and Dean/Program Director/Chair discuss the program review results and request a 5-year Action Plan.

The Action Plan executes Academic Review Committee recommendations and details specific activities, timelines, and resource allocations. Each year, the program provides an Annual Progress Report on the initial plan and updates are requested as necessary.

• Action Plan Template
• Action Plan Update Template