Western Association of Schools and Colleges Handbook of Accreditation:

• Standard Four: Educational Programs:
• Standard 4.A: General Requirements

CSU Chancellor’s Office Memorandum AP 71-32:

• Performance Review of Existing Degree Major Programs

SFSU Academic Senate Policy #S99-161:

• Guidelines for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review

SFSU Academic Senate Resolution #RS92-105:

• Resolution Endorsing the Final Report of the Working Committee on Multicultural Perspectives in the Curriculum

SFSU Academic Senate Policy #S92-179 (excerpted):

• Position Statement and Plan of Action: Multicultural Perspectives in the Curriculum. Excerpt entitled "Principles Recommended by the Working Committee on Multicultural Perspectives in the Curriculum"

APPENDICES

WESTERN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES

HANDBOOK OF ACCREDITATION

STANDARD FOUR: EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS

The following is the section entitled "STANDARD 4.A, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS"

The achievement and maintenance of quality programs is the primary responsibility of every accredited institution; hence, the evaluation of educational programs and their continuous improvement is an ongoing responsibility. As it analyzes its goals and discovers how conditions and needs change, the institution continually redefines for itself the elements that will result in programs of high quality.

4.A.1 The institution demonstrates its commitment to high standards of teaching and scholarship. Adequate procedures and resources exist to evaluate and improve the quality of instruction.

4.A.2 The institution provides an environment conducive to study and learning.

4.A.3 The structure and goals of all educational programs (including special programs and courses as defined in 4.E) are consistent with institutional purposes; they are developed, approved, administered, and periodically reviewed under established institutional policies and procedures through a clearly defined process.

4.A.4 Degree programs have a coherent design and are characterized by continuity, sequential progression, and a synthesis of learning.

4.A.5 In each field of study, degree objectives are clearly specified: the subject matter to be covered; the intellectual skills and learning methods to be acquired; the affective and creative capabilities to be developed; and, if relevant, the specific career-preparation practices to be mastered.

4.A.6 Efforts are undertaken to develop and implement ways to measure the educational effectiveness of programs.

4.A.7 Whenever the institution admits groups of students with special needs (e.g., international students, disabled students, reentry students) or identifies a group which may have unique needs (e.g., honor students), there are adequate academic support and enrichment services to meet the special needs of these students.

4.A.8 Courses and programs are planned both for optimal learning and accessible scheduling. Programs offered in concentrated or abbreviated time frames are designed to ensure that courses requiring development of analytical skills allow sufficient time to permit reflective analysis of the material. Where such instructional formats are employed, the institution is under a particular obligation to meet the expectations of 4.A.6.

4.A.9 Programs and courses are offered in a manner that ensures students the opportunity to complete the entire program as announced.

4.A.10 Each student is taught by a sufficient number of different faculty to ensure diversity of instruction and exposure to different viewpoints.

GUIDELINES FOR THE FIFTH CYCLE OF ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW

Academic Senate Policy #S99-161

(Formerly Academic Senate Policy #S89-161)

At its meeting of February 23, 1999, the Academic Senate approved the following policy for guidelines for the fifth cycle of Academic Program Review:

The purpose of academic program review at San Francisco State University is to assess the University's academic degree programs in order to assure that they are of the highest possible quality. Its goals include identifying and articulating the values, competencies, and learning outcomes expected for each program, assessing the currency of learning objectives, and describing how those learning objectives have been revised in response to changing needs and new knowledge. Additionally, its purpose includes assessing how well the articulated values, competencies, and learning outcomes have been achieved and describing methods being employed to increase their achievement. The review should provide information, analysis, and evaluation that will help all elements of the University plan and make decisions about the maintenance, enhancement, reduction, consolidation, or discontinuance of baccalaureate, master's, and joint-doctoral degree programs.

Academic program review in the fifth cycle will include the following three components:

1. Instructional Unit Self-Study and Recommendation

2. External Review and Recommendation

3. University Review and Decision-Making

1. Instructional Unit Self-Study and Recommendation

At the start of the process for a given College, representatives from the instructional units, the College, the Office of Academic Affairs, and the Academic Program Review Committee (APRC) will meet to discuss substantive and procedural questions. Those attending should indicate any specific areas or issues needing to be addressed, so that these may be given special attention in the review process.

Every instructional unit which offers academic programs leading to baccalaureate, master's, or joint doctoral degrees (other than those subject to periodic accreditation review) shall prepare a self-study that will serve as a basis for all subsequent reviews and recommendations. In this self-study, the unit should describe and assess each degree program it offers, following the guidelines that appear in the Handbook for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review. Department chairs and program heads should assure that there is widespread faculty participation in the self-studies and that the faculty are made aware of all findings and recommendations.

The unit shall forward its completed self-study to the Office of Academic Affairs and to the College Dean for their respective review and signatures indicating that the self study is complete and ready for external review.

2. External Review and Recommendation

The purpose of external review is to help each instructional unit improve the quality of its degree programs and to add an additional perspective to the recommendations made in the self-study. It is anticipated that the external reviewers will provide evaluative assistance and support for program goals.

Typically, the review will be conducted by a team of two members, representing both a CSU and a non-CSU perspective.

The unit faculty and the College Dean, working together, shall choose the potential reviewers. The College Dean shall forward their names and addresses to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for his/her concurrence. Reviewers will receive a copy of the unit's self-study and supporting documents and are expected to spend two days on the campus interviewing students, faculty, and administrators and to prepare a report of findings and recommendations. Copies of this report shall be sent to the program head and to the College Dean, both of whom will be invited to respond in writing, commenting on recommendations made and adding recommendations as needed. The report and responses will become part of the unit's program review file evaluated by the Academic Program Review Committee and the Office of Academic Affairs. Upon receipt of the report, the University will pay the reviewers an honorarium (in addition to travel costs and other expenses).

3. University Review and Decision-Making

In order to provide a University-wide faculty perspective and assist in University-wide planning, the Academic Program Review Committee will carefully review each unit's self-study, external review report, and responses to the external review. APRC will meet with the College Dean and program faculty to ensure that APRC fully understands all recommendations made. APRC will accept additional data and recommendations from the units at this time. It will then proceed to evaluate all recommendations and send its report to the Chair of the Academic Senate and the Vice President for Academic Affairs for transmission to all interested parties. APRC should review all recommendations in a timely fashion and submit its findings to appropriate units as expeditiously as possible. APRC will also send any policy recommendations and its annual report to the Academic Senate.

After the faculty of the instructional unit, the College Dean, and the Office of Academic Affairs have had an opportunity to study all reports and recommendations, representatives of these three areas will meet to discuss recommendations and agree on actions to be taken. This agreement will be embodied in a memorandum of understanding which will be in effect until the completion of the next review cycle. This memorandum of understanding will be kept on file in the Offices of Academic Affairs and the Academic Senate.

Accredited Programs

For programs that are nationally accredited and undergo periodic accreditation review involving a campus visit by an accrediting team (see attachment), the accreditation review will normally substitute for academic program review with the following exceptions:

(a) Following receipt of notification from the accrediting body that a program has been re-accredited, representatives of the instructional unit, College administration, and Office of Academic Affairs will develop a memorandum of understanding embodying agreements reached in the accreditation review. This memorandum of understanding will be in effect until completion of the next accreditation review and will be kept on file in the Offices of Academic Affairs and the Academic Senate.

(b) Upon special request of the instructional unit, College Dean, and/or Vice President for Academic Affairs, an accredited program shall undergo academic program review in addition to accreditation review. In this event, the self-study prepared for accreditation may be adapted or substituted, as appropriate, for the purpose of program review, and the campus visit by the accrediting team may be substituted for the external review.

Program Review Schedule

As nearly as feasible, programs shall be reviewed on a six year cycle by College, in alphabetical order of College, beginning in Fall, 1999. College Deans should assure that their Colleges' programs are reviewed in a timely fashion and that there is appropriate dissemination of information and recommendations.

The Liberal Studies and General Education programs shall also undergo review during the fifth cycle.

Handbook for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review

A handbook will be prepared based on the Handbook for the Fourth Cycle of Academic Program Review, with the following modifications:

(a) In preparing the fifth cycle handbook, the content of the fourth cycle handbook will be reviewed and edited for accuracy and for inclusion of the principles delineated in the following documents (currently included as appendices to the fourth cycle handbook):

• The self-study guidelines which appear as Attachment A of Academic Senate Policy S89-161, "Guidelines for the Fourth Cycle of Academic Program Review."

• "The APRC Perspective in Academic Program Review."

(b) The fifth cycle handbook will include changes made to program review as approved by the

Academic Senate in the "Guidelines for the Fifth Cycle of Academic Program Review."

(c) The fifth cycle handbook will incorporate the following additional self-study guidelines:

• To help maintain the currency of academic programs, academic programs will be asked to describe the use of community advisory boards or appropriate alternatives where such bodies exist.

• Academic programs will be asked to describe the use of introductory courses/experiences which expose students to discipline-specific demands and ways of knowing, set standards of study in the discipline, provide feedback on the quality of student work, and identify opportunities to meet expected standards.

• Academic programs will be asked to describe how the curriculum integrates and enhances students’ basic skills, including critical thinking, written and oral communication, quantitative reasoning, and information access competence. Academic programs will also be asked to describe how this basic skill development is promoted and reviewed within the major program.

• Academic programs will be asked to identify to what extent their programs are interdisciplinary, to articulate the interdisciplinary philosophy of their programs and how the curriculum reflects it, and to describe any plans they may have for cross-department and/or cross-college collaborations.

• Graduate programs will be asked to address the level of preparation of admitted students, the investment of faculty and other resources in the graduate program compared with the undergraduate program(s), student research/scholarship (publications, exhibitions, public presentations, etc.), completion rates of the culminating experience, and average time to degree.

**APPROVED BY PRESIDENT CORRIGAN ON MARCH 2, 1999**

SFSU PROGRAMS SUBJECT TO PERIODIC REVIEW FOR NATIONAL ACCREDITATION

Spring 1999

COLLEGE PROGRAM DEGREE(S) ACCREDITING ORGANIZATION

Business Business Admin. BS/MS/MBA American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business

Hospitality Mgmt BS American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business

Taxation MS American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business

Creative Arts Art BA/MA/MFA National Association of Art and Design

Drama BA/MA National Association of Schools of Theatre

Music BA/MA/BM/MM National Association of Schools of Music

Education Communicative Disorders BA/MS American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Education MA/EdD/PhD National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education

Special Education MA National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education

HHS Counseling MS Council for Accred. of Counseling & Related Ed. Programs

Dietetics BS American Dietetic Association

Family & Consumer Sci. BA/MA American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences

Nursing BS/MS Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education

Physical Therapy MS American Physical Therapy Association

Recreation BA/MS National Recreation and Park Association

Rehabilitation Counseling MS Council on Rehabilitation Education

Social Work BA/MSW Council on Social Work Education

Humanities Journalism BA Accred. Council on Ed. In Journalism & Mass Commun.

Science Biomedical Lab. Science BS/MS National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Lab. Sciences

and Engin. Computer Science BS/MS Computing Sciences Accreditation Board

Engineering BS Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

WHEREAS The report issued by the University Commission on Human Relations included the recommendation that the University consider ways of "strengthening its curriculum with the goal of enhancing mutual understanding, reducing intolerance and discrimination, and strengthening students' knowledge and appreciation of the cultural history, cultural identity, cultural contributions, and social conditions of other groups"; and

WHEREAS The Academic Senate, in May 1991, passed a resolution (RS91-93) calling for the formation of a working group on multicultural perspectives in the curriculum; and

WHEREAS The Senate charged the group, known as the Working Committee on Multicultural Perspectives in the Curriculum (WC/MPC), with 1) "developing for Senate approval and Presidential concurrence a position statement which affirms the importance of providing a Multicultural curriculum and the role of the School of Ethnic Studies in this endeavor and which is consistent with community needs and those of the State Master Plan" and 2) "presenting a plan of action for enhancing multicultural education in accordance with the position statement"; and

WHEREAS The WC/MPC addressed difficult and sensitive issues and achieved consensus on the recommendations contained in their final report; therefore be it

RESOLVED That the Academic Senate commend the WC/MPC for their precedent-setting efforts which epitomized the collegial process; and be it further

RESOLVED That the Academic Senate endorse the final report of the WC/MPC and thereby adopt the position statement, the statement of the role of the School of Ethnic Studies, and the plan of action for implementing the position statement; and be it further

RESOLVED That the Academic Senate charge the Executive Committee with seeking the concurrence of the President regarding the position statement, thus establishing it as official University policy; and be it further

RESOLVED That the Academic Senate charge the Executive Committee with initiating implementation of the plan of action; and be it further

RESOLVED That this resolution be forwarded to the Chair of the Academic Senate, CSU and to the chairs of the CSU campus Academic Senates.

PRINCIPLES RECOMMENDED BY THE WORKING COMMITTEE

ON MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVES IN THE CURRICULUM

Jan Gregory, J.E. (Penny) Saffold, James Todd

San Francisco State University 1992

[excerpted from Position Statement and Plan of Action: Multicultural

Perspectives in the Curriculum -- Academic Senate Policy #S92-179]

1. SFSU affirms that the curriculum of the University should draw upon and reflect the diversity in perspectives and ways of knowing inherent in the Bay Area's, and the modern world's, population.
2. SFSU affirms that for the purposes of addressing the demand for multi-cultural education, the University will define broadly those denoted, including cultures or ethnic, multi-ethnic, and bicultural groups as defined in the scholarly literature and groups or communities as defined both in scholarly literature and in daily experience: women, the gay/lesbian/bisexual community, the disabled, the elderly.
3. SFSU recognizes that no single approach to the inclusion of culturally sensitive and diverse perspectives can address all the issues raised by this range of groups, that the academy's curricular and pedagogical responses to issues arising from the traditional exclusion of these groups from the curriculum must itself be flexible and inclusionary.
4. SFSU affirms the importance of distinguishing which of a broad range of goals a specific course or courses may be addressing in responding to the mandate for multicultural education; these goals may vary according to discipline, the orientation of a discipline, the perceived capabilities and expertise of faculty within the discipline. In some cases, a focus on "teaching to diversity" may be more relevant than well-meant but inadequate attempts to "teach about diversity," and more appropriate to the discipline itself. In other cases, the focus will more naturally be upon contributions to the human record and/or to the discipline itself made by persons of diverse backgrounds, orientations, cultural/intellectual styles, or upon social action to remedy inequities, or upon economic issues. In yet others, the focus will most appropriately be upon the human relations aspects of living in a pluralistic society. And in some, the focus will be issues of biculturalism or bilingualism as the means by which a course can present students with greater knowledge of and exploration into the significance of value patterns, differing discourse models and logics, ways of processing "reality," modes of knowing and behaving.
5. SFSU recognizes that multicultural education is not a fixed fact but a comparatively new--and evolving--way of thinking about the task of the University, calling for a pedagogy which has yet to be fully explored and which will undoubtedly change over time. It recognizes as well that its faculty will continue to explore and develop discipline-specific approaches to inclusion within the curriculum of the perspectives, knowledge, and experience of diverse peoples. Thus SFSU affirms that multicultural education is itself multi-dimensional and multi-tiered.
6. SFSU affirms the collaborative nature of the scholarly enterprise and applauds existing collaborative efforts to infuse "multicultural content" in the curriculum in units outside Ethnic Studies. It believes that the absence of such collaboration can foredoom legitimate and valuable movement toward change. It also believes that policies and procedures are already in place for resolving the kinds of difficulties that may arise in the pursuit of more diverse curricula.
7. SFSU affirms the unique role of its School [now College] of Ethnic Studies as a standard- bearer in the creation and evolution of an academic discipline which focuses on ethnicity and whose methodology and paradigms of knowledge set it apart from other disciplines. The University distinguishes between the goals and tasks of the School [now College] and those of multicultural education, but cautions against the possibility that the latter might become a euphemism for academic "business as usual," or "integration" of "minority" perspectives into the "dominant" academic perspective.
8. SFSU acknowledges that the Women Studies Department also uses disciplinary methodology and paradigms parallel to those used in Ethnic Studies, only with gender being its major focus. In the interest of more inclusive campus curricula, the Women Studies Department is committed to the study of the experiences, perspectives, and contributions of all women. Women Studies was the first program on campus to fuse the study of race, gender and class, and continues to be committed to the study of women around the globe in all their specific cultural and cross-cultural contexts.