Program Evaluation Team

The Program Review Evaluation Team consists of at least two and up to four members who meet the following criteria:

  •  At least one faculty member from outside the University, but within the discipline. This individual may be from within or outside Utah or may be part of a professional accreditation team.
    • Please see this article from the Chronicle of Higher Education on the selection of an external reviewer.
  • A second faculty member from either outside or inside of the university. This is at the program faculty's discretion with approval from the Dean. If the second member of the site visit team is chosen from outside the university, it is highly recommended that the committee include a third, internal faculty member. This individual can provide important institutional context to the outside members.
  • This 'Good Practice' in site visit team selection may be helpful.

Program Review Evaluation Team members must disclose all conflict of interest issues to the Program Faculty and/or Dean prior to being approved to serve on the Team. Please review this definition of Conflict of Interest.

The Evaluation Team is responsible for identifying program strengths, challenges, and recommendations for change which are based on self-study standards. Specifically, the Evaluation Team responsibilities include:


Semester 'by' Date  Tasks/Responsibilities
Year 1 Spring March 15         
  • The Program Review Evaluation Team, prior to the campus visit, reviews all relevant materials, conducts the on-campus visit, and interviews key program individuals (faculty, current students, administrators - deans and chairs, and if time permits recent graduates, employers of graduates, members from advisory committees or other community organizations, etc.) to verify the self study. The Evaluation Team evaluates the program against self-study standards. Members should submit requests for additional materials and/or schedule changes to the Program Faculty.
  April 1
  • The Program Review Evaluation Team prepares a 3 - 5 page narrative report, consistent with the self-study standards, addressing all self-study standards (A-G).
  • The report guidelines call for the identification of the following:
    • program strengths - referencing Standard where appropriate
    • program challenges - referencing Standard where appropriate
    • program weaknesses - referencing Standard where appropriate
    • recommendations for change towards meeting the standards
    • additional recommendations from the review team
  • The report should be submitted to the Program Faculty, with a copy to the Academic Dean.