CHAPTER 7 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS AND CURRICULUM

SECTION 10: DELETING MAJORS, MINORS, AND CERTIFICATES (PROGRAM DISCONTINUANCE)

(To see who has authority to approve changes to this section, please see the Approval of Changes page).

Discontinuing an academic program directly affects curriculum, students, faculty, staff, budget and planning processes; this section describes the process only for situations that do not result in faculty layoff. In every situation, decisions of program discontinuance should be made based on careful planning rather than a reaction to an immediate or temporary economic crisis or situation. Any decision to discontinue a program should be data informed, and should reflect a long-range judgment that the educational mission of the institution as a whole will be enhanced by program discontinuance. This includes the reallocation of resources to other programs with higher priority based on educational considerations. Such long-range judgments generally will involve the analysis of financial resources and the needs, value and quality of the program and any related college or school. Budget considerations should not be the primary reason for program discontinuance.

If an academic program is being considered for discontinuance, decision makers should ensure that students are not unfairly impacted by program discontinuance or restructuring.

Academic programs may be deleted in three ways:

1. A proposal to discontinue a major program due to educational considerations that will result in faculty layoff pursuant to Regent Policy Document 20-24 must follow the procedure laid out in Chapter UWSP 5 (found in Chapter 4A.2 of the UWSP handbook).

2. A proposal that will not result in faculty layoff, initiated by the academic department that oversees the program, will use the process described in Section 1 below.

3. A proposal that will not result in faculty layoff, initiated by the Dean of a college involved in the program, the Provost, or the Chancellor, will use the process described in Section II below.

I. PROGRAM DELETION INITIATED BY AN ACADEMIC DEPARTMENT

The department shall follow the instructions on the Program Form. Contact the Common Council Secretary for a copy of the form or go to the Forms and Resources link on the Common Council website.

The department shall include a justification for eliminating the program. Considerations such as the following may be addressed as appropriate:

• The quality of the program in the areas of teaching and learning, and the contributions of its faculty in research, creative activity, and service;

• The contribution of the program to the mission and strategic plan of the institution, the overall quality of academic offerings, and the strategic plan of the institution;

• Student demand for the program as measured by student enrollment, retention, graduation trends, and applicable variables;

• The resource implications of retaining or eliminating the program;

o The uniqueness/redundancy of the program within the institution and across the UW System;

• Opportunities for collaboration with other programs within the institution or at other UW institutions; and

• The impact of program elimination on systemwide array and student access to programs.

II. PROGRAM DELETION INITIATED BY THE DEAN, PROVOST, OR CHANCELLOR

A. Initiation of a proposal

1. The Dean, Provost, or Chancellor will compile a proposal based on the criteria described below. If a Dean or the Chancellor initiates the proposal, they shall submit it to the Provost for review.

2. The proposal must contain the following supporting information, as applicable:

• Initiating party

• Name of proposed program

• Program description

• Rationale for discontinuance

• Proposed budget, detailing projected costs and savings associated with discontinuance

• Impact on students currently enrolled

• Impact on faculty currently teaching in the program

• Impact on staff currently needed for program implementation

• Impact on other campus programs

• Impact on facilities currently used in the program

• Impact on collaborating institutions or articulated programs

• Impact on course transfer opportunities

• Impact on regional stakeholders, external funders, or donors

• Impact on diversity at UWSP

• Impact of discontinuance on mission of the department, college, and institution

• Impact on accreditation or other external requirements

• A detailed plan and timeline for phasing out the program with the minimum possible impact on students, faculty, staff and the community. The plan must describe how currently enrolled students shall continue their programs of study or meet their educational objectives through alternative means.

3. If the Provost approves the proposal, it will then be reviewed by a Discontinuance Committee.

B. Review of a proposal by a Discontinuance Committee

1. Proposals will first be reviewed by a Discontinuance Committee of individuals not affiliated with the program under consideration. . The committee will be appointed by the Provost in agreement with the Executive Committee of Common Council. The chair for the committee will be established by the committee members. This make-up of the committee will include:

• One dean representing a college not affiliated with the program under consideration, nominated by the Chair of Common Council;

• Two students not affiliated with the program under consideration, nominated by the SGA Vice President and Speaker of the Senate, with consent of the Senate;

• Two faculty representatives from colleges not affiliated with the program under consideration, nominated by the Chair of Faculty Council;

• An academic staff representative not affiliated with the program under consideration, nominated by the Chair of the Academic Staff Council;

• A university staff representative not affiliated with the program under consideration, nominated by the Chair of the University Staff Council.

2. In addition to the proposal elements described above, the committee’s review and evaluation will be based on the following considerations. Inapplicable items will be noted as such in the evaluation. Details regarding items can be found in the Program Discontinuance Rubric:

• The centrality of the program to the institution’s mission and strategic plan;

• The academic strength and quality of the program, and of its faculty in terms of national ratings if applicable;

• Whether the work done in the program complements that done in another essential program;

• Whether the work done in the program contributes to the General Education Program;

• Whether the work done in the program duplicates academic instruction and course content delivered in other programs at the institution;

• Whether there are opportunities for collaboration with other programs;

• Whether the program is unique to the UW Systemwide program array;

• Whether the program provides opportunities for community outreach and engagement

• Student and market demand and projected enrollment in the subject matter taught in the program;

• Current and predicted comparative cost analysis/effectiveness of the program;

• Current and past Program Review and Assessment reports; and

• Other relevant factors that the committee deems appropriate.

3. The Discontinuance Committee shall provide adequate opportunity for evidence and viewpoints to be presented, and consult the affected program faculty, staff, and students. Faculty and staff members within the program under consideration for discontinuance shall have full access to all documents related to the review.

C. Discontinuance Committee recommendation

1. Based on careful consideration of the data and criteria listed under II.B.2 above, the submitted discontinuance proposal, input provided by affected program faculty, staff, and students, and the completed Program Discontinuance Rubric, the Discontinuance Committee will vote on one of the following:

• Recommendation to Continue: A program will be recommended to continue when - after full consideration - it is decided that it is in the best interest of the department, school, college, university, its students, and the larger community to do so.

• Recommendation to Continue with Qualification: A program may be recommended to continue with qualifications. These qualifications may include a remediation plan designed to improve the viability and responsiveness of the program. A specific timeline should be provided during which the remediation plan will occur and expected outcomes should be outlined in advance. After the specific qualification period is completed, the program will be reviewed again.

• Recommendation to Discontinue: A recommendation to discontinue a program will occur when, after a full evaluation study, it is concluded that maintaining the program is no longer in the best interest of the university, its students, and the larger community.

D. Dissemination and review of report

1. The Discontinuance Committee chair will send the report and recommendation to all faculty, staff, and students affiliated with the program under consideration, as well as the Provost, Deans, SGA President, and the Common Council chair. Any of these reviewers may request that the Provost, in collaboration with the Executive Committee, appoint an Appeal Committee. Details regarding the Appeal Committee are found in section E.

The Common Council chair will submit the Discontinuance Committee report through proper governance channels for feedback in a timely manner. The Common Council chair will gather that feedback, summarize, and disseminate the results to all faculty, staff, and students affiliated with the program under consideration, as well as the Provost, Deans, SGA President, and the Executive Committee.

E. Review by an Appeal Committee Commented

1. If the Discontinuance Committee recommendation is to proceed with the discontinuance, a Discontinuance Appeal Committee (DAC) will be appointed by the Provost in agreement with the Executive Committee of Common Council. The chair for the committee will be established by the committee members. The make-up of the appeal committee will include:

• The dean of the college in the program or a representative nominated by the dean;

• The chair/head of department or area coordinator of the program under consideration

• Two students in the program, nominated by the SGA Vice President and Speaker of the Senate, with consent of the Senate

• Faculty representatives in the program under consideration nominated by tenured and tenure-track faculty involved in the program

• An academic staff representative in the program under consideration, nominated by the chair/head of department or the coordinator of the areas in the program Commented [KR10]: I tried to have distinct names for each committee, to help with clarity.

• A university staff representative in the program under consideration, nominated by the chair/head of department or the coordinator of the areas in the program

• If possible, at least one graduate of the program under consideration nominated by the faculty in the program.

2. The DAC will review the report and recommendation of the Discontinuance Committee, as well as all data collected related to the discontinuance proposal.

3. Based on careful consideration of the proposal, the data and criteria listed under II.B.2 above, and all evidence, data, and work completed by the Discontinuance Committee, the DAC will evaluate the program under consideration using the Program Discontinuance Rubric and vote on one of the following:

• Recommendation to Continue: A program will be recommended to continue when - after full consideration - it is decided that it is in the best interest of the department, school, college, university, its students, and the larger community to do so.

• Recommendation to Continue with Qualification: A program may be recommended to continue with qualifications. These qualifications may include a remediation plan designed to improve the viability and responsiveness of the program. A specific timeline should be provided during which the remediation plan will occur and expected outcomes should be outlined in advance. After the specific qualification period is completed, the program will be reviewed again.

• Recommendation to Discontinue: A recommendation to discontinue a program will occur when, after a full evaluation study, it is concluded that maintaining the program is no longer in the best interest of the university, its students, and the larger community.

4. The DAC will prepare a final report, which includes their recommendation. The template for this report can be requested from the Common Council Office. The report will minimally include the committee membership, the initial proposal, an analysis of the criteria used to evaluate the proposal, the committee’s recommendation, and the rationale for the recommendation. If the DAC issues a Commented [KR11]: I just wrote out the steps, to help with clarity. These steps were the intent of the previous language, just not very clear. different recommendation than the Discontinuance Committee, the rationale for this decision will be outlined.

5. The Discontinuance Appeal Committee chair will send the report and recommendation to all faculty, staff, and students affiliated with the program under consideration, as well as the Provost, Deans, SGA President, and the Common Council chair.

6. The Common Council chair will submit the Discontinuance Appeal Committee report through proper governance channels for feedback in a timely manner.

F. Final Report

The Common Council chair will analyze feedback on the DAC report, summarize both the initial Discontinuance Committee Report and the Discontinuance Appeal Committee Report, and disseminate the results to all faculty, staff, and students affiliated with the program under consideration, as well as the Provost, Deans, SGA President, the Executive Committee, and the Chancellor.

The timetable for the program discontinuance process is below:

Section 3: Program Discontinuation Rubric