Academic Program Prioritization (APP) Moves Forward

On November 24, the Academic Program Prioritization Committee (APPC) held its first public forum. I was one of approximately 60 in attendance for a very informative 1.5 hour session.

What is APP?

“Portland State is conducting an APP (Academic Program Prioritization) process during the 2014-15 academic year as a way to take stock of the broad range of academic programs that our university offers. More specifically, the results of this process will be used to support well-informed, strategic planning for the purposes of program development and resource allocation and to help in identifying new opportunities and directions for the university. The goal is to build and share a greater understanding of who we are, what we do, and how we interact with and support one another through our diverse array of academic programs.” -- Academic Program Prioritization Committee

Mark Jones, Professor of Computer Science and Chair of the APPC, facilitated the session by: 

• Providing an overview of the APP process  
• Discussing and soliciting feedback on the draft proposals for Criteria, Metrics, and Questions that will be used. 
• Discussing and soliciting feedback on the draft proposed list of academic programs that are included in the review.
• Discussing initial plans for the scoring phase of the APP process, including a role for broader faculty involvement as members of the Program Scoring Teams (or PSTs).

There were great questions and comments – some from faculty who were just learning about APP and from faculty who have been following the work of the Faculty Senate and the APPC over this past year.  Mark and the other members of the APPC did a terrific job in responding to questions and listening to the concerns and input received.  I have no doubt that the conversation was helpful to  the APPC and those present in the audience.

Learning more about APPC:

There is a lot we can all learn about APP. On August 6^th, I blogged about APP to share the preliminary work and to reiterate that this must be a faculty-driven process. It is an opportunity for our faculty to determine and make known the priorities for our academic program array.

You can follow the APPC work, including copies of the proposals and other documents at the APP website. 

You can also subscribe to the APPC discussion mailing list via the blog site. As of last week the appc-discuss@lists.pdx.edu had over 50 subscribers.

Next public forum:

The next public forum will be in January or February of 2015.  Details will likely be announced at the January Faculty Senate meeting (or shortly thereafter) and on the APPC blog.

APP Committee Members Include:

Sy Adler, CUPA

Talya Bauer, SBA

Samuel Henry, GSE
Mark Jones, chair, MCECS

Karin Magaldi, COTA
John Rueter, CLAS
Lynn Santelmann, CLAS

Ex Officio:
Michael Bowman (in capacity of his Library faculty position, but there is also benefit in his role as chair of Faculty Senate Budget Committee) 
Steve Harmon, Provost Office
Kathi Ketcheson, OIRP

I know members of the APPC would love to hear from you. To send a message just to APPC members please use: pdxappc@gmail.com. 

Read More

October 6, 2014 Faculty Senate Meeting

Yesterday was the first Faculty Senate meeting of the 2014-15 academic year.  The Senate has an ambitious agenda this year that includes, but is not limited to: academic program prioritization (APP), post-tenure review (a.k.a faculty peer review), university strategic planning, academic quality, family friendly policies, the potential joint OHSU/PSU School of Public Health, and textbook affordability.  This is on top of their normal business!

It is vital that the faculty play a front and center role on these important issues.  The Faculty Senate is committed to a high level of engagement, but it will require involvement beyond the Senate.  At the Senate meeting, Presiding Officer Bob Liebman mentioned a few committees and task forces (that by my simple count alone) will require the involvement of dozens of faculty members.  It will be necessary for many of you to join your Senate colleagues in the important work that will take place this year.

Some of the issues before the Senate are new areas of exploration.  Academic program prioritization (APP) is a good example.  We have never engaged in such a process at PSU.  I give great kudos to the Faculty Senate for their recognition that APP is, and must be, a faculty-driven process.  It is our faculty that must decide our array of academic programs.

The Senate is also working on existing issues with a renewed sense of commitment. Post-tenure review is an example.  PSU has had a post-tenure (peer) review process for a number of years, however, the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU), found in 2012 that “While the review of tenure-track faculty is conducted through a well-defined process, the review of faculty who have attained tenure is uneven. The evaluation committee recommends that policies and practices regarding post-tenure review be strengthened to make certain that all faculty are evaluated in a regular, systematic, substantive, and collegial manner at least once within every five-year period of service.”  We have work to do here—and we need to get it done this year not only to be in compliance with NWCCU, but to ensure academic quality through fair, effective and formative evaluation for our tenured faculty members.

The great news is that we have a shared governance process that allows for thoughtful conversations and good decision making.  I look forward to working with the Senate and all of you on these and other items.  I value any input or comments you have on this shared work.

Sona

Read More

Academic Program Prioritization planning begins

In the fall 2013, I proposed to the Faculty Senate that we engage in an academic program prioritization (APP) process (my October 2013 Faculty Senate comments and PowerPoint sides can be found at http://www.pdx.edu/faculty-senate/senate-schedules-materialst).  From the onset I stated that this would need to be a faculty-driven process and that it could only be done with the endorsement and work of the Faculty Senate.  Over the next several months there was quite a bit of conversation about Why we should do this? What would it accomplish? and What were the provost’s motives?.

These questions were followed by fruitful conversations whereby the faculty discussed the pros and cons of assessing the entire array of academic programs we offer and determining if that array reflects the university we wish to be now and in the future.  As many of you know, we have a very rigorous process for the approval of new programs, but we fall short in taking a university-wide view of programs once they are approved.

The Senate conversations (chronicled in senate minutes throughout FY14) led to a joint charge in June 2014 (see Appendix D-1 of June 2, 2104 senate materials- http://www.pdx.edu/faculty-senate/sites/www.pdx.edu.faculty-senate/files/FS_June_14_%20Agenda_finalRv%20%282%29.pdf ) from the Senate and me to create an Academic Program Prioritization Committee (APPC). I wish to applaud the Senate and the Senate Steering Committee for taking a leadership role in this critically important faculty responsibility.

The APPC had its first meeting in July.  Its members were selected by the president based on an open, university-wide nomination process and the recommendation received from the Faculty Senate Steering Committee and the Faculty Advisory Committee.  Committee members include:

Sy Adler, CUPA

Talya Bauer, SBA
Samuel Henry, GSE
Mark Jones, chair, MCECS

Karin Magaldi, COTA
John Rueter, CLAS
Lynn Santelmann, CLAS

ExOfficio:
Michael Bowman (in capacity of his Library faculty position, but there is also benefit in his role as chair of Faculty Senate Budget Committee)
Steve Harmon, Provost Office
Kathi Ketcheson, OIRP

The committee, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, and I heard concerns expressed by some faculty members that there would be an absence of faculty input if this committee began its work over the summer.   We are all very sensitive to this concern; as was the faculty senate in recommending a summer start.  I know from conversations with the committee that there will be no decision making during the summer, but rather some preliminary planning so that conversations and the work can take place with all faculty early this fall.  The committee will soon have a website where its work will be made very public with ongoing opportunities for comments/suggestions.  In addition, they will host numerous open sessions throughout the year to make sure there is adequate input from all faculty. 

I will blog on this topic from time to time to share information and my views.   I welcome your views on this topic

Read More