1. Elements of a proposal
i. The proposal will provide a rationale for the program and articulate its consistency with the mission of the university.
ii. The proposal will state program objectives and Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) outcomes.
iii. The proposal will demonstrate conformity with definitions (Policy 6.12) adopted by The Faculty.
iv. The proposal will state curricular requirements.
v. The proposal will list all course titles and descriptions in the program.
i. The proposal will demonstrate an established need for the program, in particular addressing marketability.
ii. The proposal will show financial viability.
iii. The proposal will present an operational budget for the first three years of the program.
iv. The proposal will demonstrate that sufficient resources are in place for the operation of the program in terms of facility and faculty.
Normally there will be one full-time faculty member administering the major who holds a terminal degree appropriate to the major and more than one full-time and/or adjunct faculty members with at least a Master’s degree appropriate to the major teaching in the program. Exceptions to this policy must have the expressed approval of the Undergraduate Policies Committee (UPC). Accrediting agencies require a rationale why the number of full-time faculty is adequate to support the program.
i. The proposal will identify Student Learning Outcomes and the assessment activities used to measure them.
ii. The proposal will state what tool/methods will be used to compile and analyze individual student results.
iii. The proposal will discuss what process the department will use to share data and take actions for improvement.
2. Criteria for evaluating a proposal
a. Academic components of the proposal must be of a quality comparable to or exceeding similar programming at competitive institutions and must conform to criteria set by appropriate accrediting bodies.
b. Resource components of the proposal must be appropriate to the field, comparable to competitive universities, and conform to strategic priorities and financial requirements set by the university.
c. Assessment components of the proposal must be valid and comparable to or exceed practices generally employed at the university.
a. Proposals require the recommendation of the department, the college, the vice-president for academic affairs (VPAA), senior vice-president, and the assessment council. Additional consultations and notifications may be necessary.
b. Proposals are approved by the UPC. Approval of new majors requires a 2/3 majority vote. All others require a simple majority.
c. Primary responsibility for evaluating academic components resides with the UPC and VPAA. Resource components require clearance from the senior vice president. Assessment components are the responsibility of the assessment council.
d. The UPC may not approve a proposal until it has received documented recommendations from the department, the college, the VPAA, the senior vice president, and the assessment council.
e. The chair of UPC will report approvals of all new programs to Faculty Senate.
4. Types of Proposals
a. Class A: Typical new major/minor/endorsement/certificate involving new courses and/or requiring additional resources (faculty, library, physical plant). (Where appropriate, a new major will also include a comparable minor.)
Must complete 6.22 Form 1 (Proposal Form) and Form 2 (Assessment Plan).
b. Class B: A major/minor/endorsement/certificate that repackages currently offered content in a different or interdisciplinary way. No new classes or increased offerings of current classes are necessary to launch the major/minor. However, if the new program requires a new Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP), then it may require completing the Class A requirements.
1. The proposal will include:
a. A rationale for the program and its connection with the mission of the university.
b. Program Student Learning Outcomes
c. List of requirements
d. Course descriptions
2. Obtain Department(s) and college(s) approvals.
3. Complete Assessment Plan (6.22 Form 2) and submit to assessment council.
4. VPAA approval. The department chair(s) provides a summary of the curriculum to the VPAA and demonstrates there are no additional costs to the institution in so packaging current courses.
5. The VPAA reports to the UPC that the proposal conforms to the definition of a Class B proposal.
6. The UPC votes on the proposal and reports to the Faculty Senate.
c. Class C: A new major/minor/endorsement/certificate involving a consortial arrangement with or including content
from/delivered by another institution(s) of higher learning.
1. Early in the process of preparing such a proposal, representatives of the department and the administration prepare a concept document of two to three pages that
a. Sketches the contours of the proposal in rough form
b. Documents the accreditation of the partner institution [e.g., when last renewed, for what term, any point of note significant to the program] and addresses potential concerns if the institution is not accredited by the Higher Learning Commission or its equivalent.
c. Addresses consistency with and maintenance of institutional identity (e.g., Lutheran identity). [Discussion on this point may serve a basis for the “Mission” section of the fuller proposal.] 2. Representatives of the department and the administration present the concept proposal to the UPC. The UPC may authorize further work on the proposal or request senate action.
3. Following authorization of the concept proposal, Class C proposals follow the steps for Class A proposals.
Last modified: March 15, 2018