PROGRAM REVIEW PROCEDURE

1.2.1 Academic Catalog: A resource providing specific information on the University’s academic Programs and policies.

1.2.2 Admission Requirements: The requirements for eligibility into a University Program.

1.2.3 Alumni: Graduates of the University.

1.2.4 Curriculum Enhancement: An improvement made to a Course or Program to enhance Student learning, align with University Strategic Priorities, or meet Accreditation and industry standards.

1.2.5 Curriculum Map: A visual representation of a program that maps Course Learning Outcomes against Graduate Attributes, Program Educational Objectives, Student Learning Outcomes, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, Accrediting Body Requirements, and Professional Body Requirements.

1.2.6 Cyclical Program Review Team: A team of Academic Staff Members tasked with the review of an academic program and consisting of at least one (1) Academic Member from the college, one (1) process expert from Program Development and Accreditation, and one (1) technical writer/copy editor.

1.2.7 External Reviewer: An independent subject-matter expert, unaffiliated with the University, appointed to evaluate an academic Program proposal to ensure alignment with academic standards, industry requirements, and Accreditation criteria.

1.2.8 Internal Reviewer: An Academic Member from the University who is not affiliated with the academic Program under review, appointed to evaluate an academic Program proposal to ensure alignment with academic standards, industry requirements, and Accreditation criteria.

1.2.9 Program Educational Objectives (PEOs): The knowledge, skills, and competencies a graduate can demonstrate within 2–3 years of graduation.

1.2.10 Strategic Plan: A document that describes the Vision, Mission, Values, Strategic Priorities, Action Items, and Success Measures and sets the future direction of the institution.

3.1.1 The Department/Program Head prepares an Annual Program Review Proposal v.1 that must include:

3.1.1.1 Implementation date of the Program.

3.1.1.2 Date of last Annual Program Review.

3.1.1.3 Analysis of Learning Outcomes.

3.1.1.4 Analysis of enrollment and graduation data.

3.1.1.5 Analysis of survey data (student surveys, Alumni surveys, employer surveys).

3.1.1.6 Analysis of resources (human capital, facilities, financial, support services).

3.1.1.7 Proposed changes to human capital, facilities, financial, and support services for the following Academic Year.

3.1.1.8 Proposed Curriculum Enhancements for the following Academic Year.

3.1.2 Each version of the Annual Program Review Proposal incorporates feedback from the previous review stage.

3.1.3 The Program Curriculum Committee reviews the Annual Program Review Proposal v.1 to ensure depth and breadth of analysis and provides feedback to the Department/Program Head.

3.1.4 The College Curriculum Committee reviews the Annual Program Review Proposal v.2 to ensure alignment with college continuous improvement best practices and provides feedback to the Department/Program Head.

3.1.5 The Department/Program Head prepares an Annual Program Review Proposal v.3 and submits it to the Dean.

3.1.6 The Dean submits the proposal to the Office of the Vice-President, Academics, with a copy to the Program Development and Accreditation Department for archival purposes and future input into the Cyclical Program Review process.

3.2.1 Stage One: Initiation of Cyclical Program Review

3.2.1.1 In consultation with Deans, the Program Development and Accreditation Department develops a five-year Program Review Schedule and seeks endorsement from Academic Council.

3.2.1.2 In compliance with the five-year Cyclical Program Review Schedule, the Office of the Vice-President, Academics initiates the Cyclical Program Review.

3.2.1.3 The Program Development and Accreditation Department identifies and secures suitable Internal and External Reviewers for endorsement by the Dean/Academic Manager, followed by the Office of the Vice-President, Academics.

3.2.2 Stage Two: Development and Approval of Cyclical Program Review Proposal

3.2.2.1 Each version of the proposal incorporates feedback from the previous review stage.

3.2.2.2 The Cyclical Program Review Team develops a Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.1 in consultation with Stakeholders.

3.2.2.3 The Cyclical Program Review Proposal includes the following components, either recommending modifications or reaffirming the existing status:

3.2.2.3.1 Alignment with Qatar National Qualifications Framework.

3.2.2.3.2 Alignment with National priorities in Research and education.

3.2.2.3.3 Alignment with University mission and Strategic Priorities.

3.2.2.3.4 Alignment with University’s Academic Programs Development Framework.

3.2.2.3.5 Alignment with Relevant Accreditation benchmarks.

3.2.2.3.6 Alignment with Relevant Professional Association benchmarks.

3.2.2.3.7 Labor Market Analysis.

3.2.2.3.8 External trend analysis.

3.2.2.3.9 Analysis of Curriculum (annual reports, Learning Outcomes).

3.2.2.3.10 Analysis of resources (human capital, facilities, financial, support services).

3.2.2.3.11 Academic Catalog entry (Program title, Program description, Program duration, Admission Requirements, Program Educational Objective, Student Learning Outcomes, study plan, graduate future pathways, graduate career opportunities).

3.2.2.3.12 Course master syllabi.

3.2.2.3.13 Curriculum mapping matrix.

3.2.2.4 The Program Curriculum Committee reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.1 for breadth and depth of analysis and provides feedback to the Cyclical Program Review Team, with a copy to the College Curriculum Committee. The review specifically ensures that:

3.2.2.4.1 The depth and breadth of the analysis and consultations are sufficient to support the proposal.

3.2.2.4.2 Program description, duration, Admission Requirements, Program educational outcomes, Student Learning Outcomes, graduate future pathways, and graduate career opportunities are aligned with the writing guidelines.

3.2.2.4.3 The Study plan is sound with all pre- and co-requisites appropriate to support progression.

3.2.2.4.4 Sufficient human capital and financial resources have been indicated.

3.2.2.4.5 The master Curriculum mapping matrix is complete.

3.2.2.4.6 Course master syllabi are complete.

3.2.2.5 The College Curriculum Committee reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.2 for alignment with college requirements and provides feedback to the Cyclical Program Review Team, with a copy to the University Curriculum and Program Development Committee. The review specifically ensures that:

3.2.2.5.1 The proposal aligns with college Strategic Plan and requirements.

3.2.2.5.2 Human capital and financial resources are available.

3.2.2.5.3 Consultations were broad and documentation, including Stakeholder recommendations and actions items, have been included.

3.2.2.5.4 Program educational outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes are appropriately scaffolded.

3.2.2.5.5 Master Curriculum mapping minimizes over- and under-coverage.

3.2.2.5.6 Credit Hours are appropriately assigned and consistent with college requirements.

3.2.2.6 The Program Development and Accreditation Department sends the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.3 to the Internal and External Reviewers.

3.2.2.7 Upon receipt of the Reviewers’ responses, the Program Development and Accreditation Department sends the feedback to the Dean of the college/Academic Manager and the Cyclical Program Review Team.

3.2.2.8 In the event of a significant disagreement between Curriculum Committees or Reviewers, the issue will be referred to the Office of the Vice-President, Academics for resolution, in consultation with the Dean/Academic Manager and the Program Development and Accreditation Department.

3.2.2.9 The Cyclical Program Review Team prepares a Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.4 to incorporate relevant feedback of the Reviewers and responds to each recommendation noting the action taken, if any, and submits the revised proposal to the Dean of the college/Academic Manager.

3.2.2.10 The University Curriculum and Program Development Committee reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.4 and provides feedback to the Cyclical Program Review Team, with a copy to Academic Council. The review specifically ensures that the Cyclical Program Review Proposal aligns with:

3.2.2.10.1 Qatar National Qualifications Framework.

3.2.2.10.2 National priorities in Research and education.

3.2.2.10.3 University mission and Strategic Priorities.

3.2.2.10.4 University’s Academic Programs Development Framework.

3.2.2.10.5 Interdisciplinary opportunities have been considered.

3.2.2.10.6 Areas of duplication or overlap with other Programs have been minimized.

3.2.2.10.7 Admission Requirements are aligned with University requirements and facilitate Program success.

3.2.2.11 The Academic Council reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.5 and provides feedback to the Cyclical Program Review Team, with a copy to the President. The review specifically ensures that the Cyclical Program Review Proposal aligns with:

3.2.2.11.1 Qatar National Qualifications Framework.

3.2.2.11.2 National priorities in Research and education.

3.2.2.11.3 University mission and Strategic Priorities.

3.2.2.11.4 University’s Academic Programs Development Framework.

3.2.2.12 The President reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.6 and sends it to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees.

3.2.2.13 The Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees reviews the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.6 and sends it to the Board of Trustees.

3.2.2.14 The Board approves the Cyclical Program Review Proposal v.6 for implementation.

3.3.1 All versions of the Annual and Cyclical Program Review Proposals must include a version history table documenting revisions and Stakeholder input.

3.3.2 Final endorsed and approved documents are archived by the Program Development and Accreditation Department in accordance with the official University’s records and must be made available for audit or Accreditation purposes.