Program Review Standing Committee

Currently, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee fills the role of the Program Review Standing Committee (PRSC). At the conclusion of each Program Review the department chair or the program director presents the review findings to this committee. PRSC members have access to all documents from the review - the original self-study, the review team report, the faculty response to that report, and the dean response. The committee and the department chair or director also have a draft of the Board of Trustees/Regents summary report, which is compiled by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness.

PRSC members ask questions about the review process and the findings, often asking for clarification or additional information. At the conclusion of this brief meeting (generally no more than 30 minutes), the committee deliberates in the absence of the department chair or program director. The committee determines any needed follow-up items for the department/program, identifies commendations and additional recommendations, and makes a recommendation to the Provost as to when the department/program should complete the next program review.

In rare cases, the PRSC may recommend that a program complete the next review in three years. There may be a variety of reasons for this and may include 1) an unsatisfactory review process, 2) a program undergoing significant curricular change, 3) significant structural or resources issues, and others.

The PRSC may recommend a five-year return for the program. This is a typical recommendation which allows a program to implement and monitor changes suggested by the review team.

Finally, some programs are recommended to complete the next program review in seven years. Programs that earn this recommendation are generally robust, well-established programs with good assessment and evaluation processes in place.

Many WSU programs are accredited by specialized accrediting agencies. In these cases, the PRSC uses the same protocol and the recommendation(s) to the Provost is generally in support of the accrediting agencies recommendations and requirement for subsequent reviews. Any concerns with the external accreditation process or findings can be raised at this presentation.