A challenge we often face in higher education is, once reporting is complete, faculty and administrators often resume their routine work without reflecting on results (Kim, 2018). To address this gap, at our university, policy states that programs are required to provide a Mid-Cycle Update to the Academic Planning and Priorities Committee of Senate (APPC) mid-way through the seven year program review cycle.
The update details how the program has addressed the program’s goals for improvement. The Module 7 Action Plan also serves as the foundation for the Mid-Cycle Update four years following completion of the Program Review Course and asks faculty to reflect upon their progress over the preceding years, including noting whether goals are in progress, completed, modified, or removed; and asks programs to list steps taken to address issues or barriers that may have arisen since the time that the goals were originally drafted.
Timeline: May 1 – October 1
Due Date: October 1
Deans are notified by the Associate Director on May 1 that they are scheduled to provide a Mid-Cycle Update to APPC in October. This allows for five months to complete the Mid-Cycle Update template, which is a modified version of the Module 7 Action Plan template.
Below is a step-by-step breakdown of the development, approval, and presentation of the Mid-Cycle Update:
|Program Review Team||Program review team write the report using the template provided, detail how the program has addressed the program’s goals for improvement mid-way through the 7 year program review cycle.|
|Dean||Dean reviews the Mid-Cycle Update. Once approved, the Dean forwards the Update to the Associate Director by October 1.|
|Associate Director, Academic Planning & Continuous Quality Improvement||Associate Director receives the Mid-Cycle Update and checks it for completion. Once the review is completed, the Associate Director forwards the Mid-Cycle Update to the Provost (or designate).|
|Provost (or designate)||Provost (or designate) receives the Mid-Cycle Update and considers the program’s progress. If the Provost has concerns or questions about the Mid-Cycle Update, the Provost communicates these concerns with the Dean to seek clarification. Once approved, the Provost returns the Mid-Cycle Update to the Associate Director.|
|Associate Director||Associate Director submits the Mid-Cycle Update to APPC.|
|Dean||Dean attends APPC to answer any questions that may arise.|
Kim, G. (2018). An exploratory case study of a quality assurance process at an Ontario university. University of Western Ontario, Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 5857. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/5857