Cyclical Program Review
Self-Study Form
This template is to be used for cyclical program reviews (CPRs) and must be completed by the academic unit(s) responsible for the program(s) being reviewed. Where possible, please avoid making reference to individuals; rather, discuss how the faculty as a whole delivers the program(s).
Useful Links
For information on the content of the self-study and the process for its approval, please refer to the QUQAP Guide. The evaluation criteria for the self-study are outlined here. The following strategic documents set the context for the review and will guide answers to some of the self-study questions: Queen’s Academic Plan, Strategic Framework, and Strategic Mandate Agreement.
Once reviewed by the appropriate deans, the self-study documents should be submitted, with signatures, to the Office of the Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) () electronically in three separate PDFs (Self-Study, Faculty CVs, and Supporting Documentation). Once the provost (or delegate) approves the self-study documents, the Faculty Office will send them to the members of the review team.
Please amend the footer of this document to include the name(s) of the program(s) under review (or department name if multiple programs are being reviewed). The template has a table of contents with section titles already populated. As you work through the document, please update the table of contents by going to the ‘references’ tab on the word ribbon (or the ‘document elements’ tab in some versions), then in the table of contents section, click on ‘update table’ and choose ‘update entire table.’ Please contact with any questions on this.
______
Signature(s) of Unit Head(s) / ______
Date
______
Signature(s) of Faculty Dean(s) / ______
Date
______
Signature of Vice-Provost and Dean (SGS)
(if applicable) / ______
Date
______
Signature of Vice-Provost (Teaching and Learning) / ______
Date
Part A – Summary and Quality Enhancements 3
Summary 3
Program Contribution to Queen’s Strategic Goals 4
Quality Enhancements – Undergraduate and/or Graduate 4
Development of Self-Study 5
Part B – Evaluation Criteria 6
1. Curricular Alignment of Teaching and Learning (Undergraduate) 6
2. Curricular Alignment of Teaching and Learning (Graduate) 10
3. Admission Requirements 12
4. Instruction 12
5. Resources 12
6. Equity, Diversity, and Accessibility 13
7. Academic Integrity 14
Quality Indicators 14
8. Faculty Complement and Activities 14
9. Student Attributes and the Student Experience 17
10. Program Graduates 17
11. Additional Graduate Program Criteria 18
12. Postdoctoral Fellows 21
Part C – Supporting Documentation 22
Part A – Summary and Quality Enhancements
Name of Academic Unit(s):Date of last IAR:
(if applicable) / Date of last OCGS review:
(if applicable)
Summary
Provide a summary of the program(s) identifying areas of strength and weakness, opportunities and threats (SWOT) that may shape the program(s)’s future. Describe program goals and aspirations for the next 5-10 years here. Relevant data from sections 15 and 16 should be referenced as appropriate. [Suggested 2 page maximum per program.]
Program Contribution to Queen’s Strategic Goals
1. Describe any work underway to contribute to meeting the university-wide objectives of Queen’s Strategic Framework.
2. Describe any initiatives underway to support the goals of the Comprehensive International Plan, with specific reference to curriculum, research, and student mobility.
Quality Enhancements – Undergraduate and/or Graduate
Provide summaries of the following, using relevant data from Section 16 (e.g., Exit Poll, NSSE, retention/graduation, or CGPSS data) to indicate the potential for quality improvement.
1. Changes that have occurred in response to recommendations from the program’s last review. Include descriptions of developments in curriculum (both undergraduate and graduate, as applicable) since the previous review.
2. Initiatives that have been implemented to improve the quality of the program(s) and the associated learning outcomes and teaching environment.
3. Areas identified through the conduct of the self-study as holding promise for enhancement.
4. Areas identified through the conduct of the self-study as requiring improvement.
Development of Self-Study
The development of an effective self-study should include consultation with a wide range of individuals involved with the program(s) under review. Information may be gathered through surveys, interviews, focus groups, and other similar activities. Please indicate how faculty, staff, and students were involved in the development of the self-study and what kinds of information gathering tools were used.
CPR Self-Study template Insert program name(s) here Page 21 of 22
Part B – Evaluation Criteria
To assist in the completion of this self-study, the academic unit should compile relevant background and supporting materials and (preferably) embed them in Section 15. As appropriate, relevant tables may be inserted directly into the document. Additional data summaries provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning, School of Graduate Studies, etc., may be embedded/appended in Section 16.In accordance with QUQAP, the information requested in each question should be regarded as the minimum required for self-study assessment. Further information can be found in the QUQAP Guide.
1. Curricular Alignment of Teaching and Learning (Undergraduate)
The chart below is designed to illustrate the match between the learning outcomes (LO) students are expected to achieve in core courses, and the LOs that are expected upon program completion. It is not necessary (or even likely) that each course will address each program LO, nor that each program LO will match each undergraduate degree level expectation (UDLE). Rather, the purpose is to demonstrate how each UDLE is addressed by one-or-more program LO, and each program LO is addressed by one-or-more course LO. By mapping the curriculum, the program can identify and address gaps in curriculum and/or program LOs.Programs under review are encouraged to consult with the Centre for Teaching and Learning to complete this section. We encourage flexibility and customization of sections 1, 2, and 3 to ensure the most effective representative display of the nature and design of the program's curriculum. If you have produced similar information in a different format (e.g., for accreditation purposes), in many cases you will be able to use your existing format; approval for this should be sought from the faculty office and Vice-Provost (Teaching and Learning) (also the Vice-Provost and Dean, School of Graduate Studies, for graduate programs).
You arerequired only to include core courses withinthissection. There is no obligation to map optional or elective courses. If a group of optional courses have similar learning in different contexts, you may elect to provide general learning outcomes for the grouping of optional courses.
1.1 / Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (UDLE)
1. Match each UDLE below with one or more program learning outcome.
2. Match each program learning outcome with one or more course code.
3. Match each course code with one or more course learning outcome.
4. Match each course learning outcome with one or more course assessment method.
Table 1. Mapping undergraduate curriculum to degree level expectations (DLEs) (add rows as needed)
DLE / Program Learning Outcome(s) / Course Code(s) / Course Learning Outcome / Course Assessment Method
Depth and breadth of knowledge / [Business] Learners will critically analyze their approaches to marketing to ensure due consideration of price, product, promotion, and place. / CPR231 / Learners will create an effective marketing plan to successfully launch a new product to market. / Development of, and structured reflection on, a proposed marketing plan.
Knowledge of methodologies / [All] Learners will establish an effective approach to sourcing secondary research to inform self-directed inquiry learning. / CPR256 / Learners will evaluate secondary research methods to determine validity and reliability based on stated research questions. / Critical analysis of literature review in a peer reviewed journal article.
Application of knowledge / [Engineering] Learners will design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability. / CPR231 / Engineering students will accurately evaluate the relative impact of tension, compression, shear, and flexure to discover the root cause of structural failure. / Preparation and critical reflection on a root cause case study analysis.
Communication skills /
[Political Science] Learners will communicate ethically, responsibly, and effectively as local, national, international, and global citizens and leaders.
/ CPR100 / Learners will evaluate and articulate the philosophies of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes to contrast 17th Century thinking on civic governance. / A simulated 17th century debate between John Locke and Thomas Hobbes developed and implemented by student teams.Awareness of limits of knowledge / [Health Science] Learners will critically reflect on ethical controversies associated with stem cell research to develop an informed, critical, and open-minded stance. / CPR130 / Learners will critically analyze current stem cell research literature to establish a personal stance on therapeutic stem cell interventions. / Create a learning journal outlining the role of stem cells in human health, with a reflection on the ethics of therapeutic stem-cell interventions.
Autonomy and professional capacity / [Psychology] Apply knowledge of psychological principles, critical thinking, research skills, imagination, insight and judgment to problem solving in personal, social, and organizational issues. / CPR230 / Recognize, understand, and respect the complexity of sociocultural and international diversity. / Review and interpret psychological drives influencing behaviours in three major world cultures.
… (add program-specific DLE)
1.2 Describe how the means of assessment (particularly in the students’ final year of the undergraduate program(s)) appropriately and effectively demonstrate achievement of the program(s)’ learning objectives. [Suggested maximum 250 words]
1.3 Describe how the undergraduate curriculum outline addresses the four pillars of Queen’s University’s Academic Plan, including the transferable academic skills listed on page 8 of the plan (e.g., critical thinking, problem solving). [Suggested maximum 200 words]
2. Curricular Alignment of Teaching and Learning (Graduate)
Graduate Degree Level Expectations – In Table 2 below, summarize how the graduate program’s structure and requirements address each graduate degree level expectation (GDLE) listed, as well as any additional program-specific DLEs. [Refer to Graduate Degree Learning Expectations, Appendix 1, QUQAP for more information]. Programs under review are encouraged to consult with the Centre for Teaching and Learning to complete this section.Table 2. Mapping graduate curriculum to graduate degree level expectations (add rows as needed)
Expectations (general descriptors from OCAV) / Learning Outcomes (program specific)
This degree is awarded to students who demonstrate… / Indicators of Achievement
As evidenced by… / Relevant Courses and Academic Requirements
(requirements that contribute to the achievement of learning outcomes and degree expectations)
Depth and breadth of knowledge
Research and scholarship
Professional capacity/autonomy
Communication Skills
Awareness of limits of knowledge
Application of Knowledge
2.2 Describe how the means of assessment appropriately and effectively demonstrate achievement of the program(s)’ learning objectives [Suggested maximum 250 words]
2.3 Describe how the graduate curriculum outline addresses the four pillars of Queen’s University’s academic plan, including the transferable academic skills listed on page 8 of the plan (e.g., critical thinking, problem solving). [Suggested maximum 200 words]
CPR Self-Study template Insert program name(s) here Page 21 of 22
3. Admission Requirements
When completing this section, refer as appropriate to relevant documents embedded in (or appended to) Sections 15 and/or 16 (e.g., admission regulations).
3.1 Provide a brief description of how admission requirements (GPA) ensure that students accepted into the program possess the attributes required for successful program completion. [Suggested maximum 250 words]
4. Instruction
When completing this section, you must refer to relevant data tables, documents, etc., embedded in (or appended to) Sections 15 and 16, particularly the Undergraduate Exit Poll, NSSE, CGPSS, undergraduate retention and graduation, graduate time to completion and completion rate, etc.
4.1 Explain how the program(s)’ instructional philosophy and modes of delivery align with learning outcomes stated in table(s) 1 and/or 2. [Suggested maximum 500 words]
4.2 Describe any significant innovation or creativity in the content and/or delivery of the Program(s) relative to other such programs. [Suggested maximum 200 words]
4.3 Where students may take the same undergraduate (or graduate) program (or elements of it) in two or more different modes of delivery, indicate how consistency in Program requirements and standards are assured. [Suggested maximum 200 words]
5. Resources
When completing this section, insert (or refer to) relevant summary tables and documents in Sections 15 and/or 16 as appropriate (e.g., Library Report, Budget, etc.).
5.1 Describe and comment on how the Academic Unit(s) has used existing library services and resources which may include: the liaison librarian for the department; library instruction; collection development; discipline-specific learning resources; reference support [refer to full Library Report in Section 16].
5.2 Comment on the appropriateness and effectiveness of other academic services (e.g. information technology, Writing Centre, Centre for Teaching and Learning, etc.) to support the program(s) being reviewed.
5.3 Describe how the academic unit(s) has appropriately and effectively used existing human (faculty and staff), physical, (laboratories, teaching space, studios, common rooms, etc.) and financial resources in support of the program(s) being reviewed. Describe advancement activities here (if applicable).
5.4 Further to 5.3 above, describe how the program is supported by staff members. Comment on any issues.
6. Equity, Diversity, and Accessibility
The Diversity and Equity Assessment and Planning (DEAP) tool has been developed by the Queen’s University Equity Office to assist units to better understand the environments and climate relating to diversity, equity, and accessibility in their units. DEAP is a self-audit tool for internal use, including a self-assessment, planning, and goal setting. The DEAP tool will assist units in understanding how they have addressed the University’s equity goals in the following twelve areas: strategic planning; policies and procedures; committee representation; admission and selection of learners; support programs and services for learners; faculty recruitment, promotion, career development and retention; communications and community relations; library collections and resources; curriculum development, assessment, and program evaluation; accessibility, and; consulting with Aboriginal communities.