Policy Table of Contents
- Intent Discussed with Appropriate Dean
- Dean Approval
- Timeline Creation
- Request for New Program Form Completion
- Appropriate Dean Approval
- College Leadership Approval
- Curriculum Committee Approval
- Faculty Assembly Approval
- Board of Trustees Education Committee Consideration
- Board of Trustees Approval
- External Approvals and Notifications
- Assessment of New Programs
Intent Discussed with Appropriate Dean
Faculty/Staff wishing to propose a new degree program should meet with the appropriate academic Dean (dependent on if the program is graduate or
undergraduate – hereafter called the “appropriate Dean”) to discuss the idea.
Dean Approval
If the Dean approves next steps, the faculty/staff member (hereafter called the “program request author”) completes the Preliminary Program Proposal form. The program request author will provide a program rationale, perform market research, anticipate costs, and consider program marketing strategies for the proposed program in response to the form’s questions. The Dean will use this form to introduce the program concept to College leadership and attain approval to move forward.
Upon receiving notice of leadership approval to move forward, the program request author will begin working on the Request for New Program form. The Dean and program request author will agree upon the level of Dean involvement in the Request for New Program form development. The program request author will discuss the proposed program with faculty and staff in departments and can be structured – for example, a work group can be developed – or unstructured and rely on individual conversations. The development of the program curriculum will incorporate both colleague input and market research completed.
Timeline Creation
The appropriate Dean will forward leadership approval of the Preliminary Program Proposal form to the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness. The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness will create a timeline for the program request based on accreditor schedules and share it with the program request author, appropriate Dean, and Dean of Academic Affairs. The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness will also provide the appropriate NASAD criteria/reference files and Plan Approval template
Request for New Program Form Completion
By the date determined on the timeline, the program request author will complete the Request for New Program form and the official internal approval process will begin.
Appropriate Dean Approval
The appropriate Dean will be the first to consider the submitted Request for New Program form and will work with the program request author to make any needed revisions.
College Leadership Approval
Upon approval by the appropriate Dean, the Request for New Program form will be forwarded to the Dean of Academic Affairs who will place the consideration of the proposed program on the Vice Presidents/Deans/President meeting agenda for College leadership consideration. The Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for signing the form on that group’s behalf if approved, and/or developing a plan to address the group’s concerns with the program request author and appropriate Dean. If approval is not granted, the Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for alerting the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness so that the timeline can be revised as necessary.
Upon approval by the College leadership team, the Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for ensuring that consideration of the program is placed on the Curriculum Committee agenda for a date agreed upon by the program request author and appropriate Dean. In addition to drafting the Request for New Program form, the program request author will complete the necessary docu- mentation (i.e. draft curriculum charts, New Course Requests, Change to Existing Course Requests) for submission.
Curriculum Committee Approval
The Curriculum Committee will consider the contents of the form and all submitted documentation and sign the form if they approve of the new program. If the approval is not granted, the Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for developing a plan to address the group’s concerns with the program request author and appropriate Dean. The Dean of Academic Affairs is also responsible for alerting the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness so that the timeline can be revised as necessary. Upon Request for New Program form approval by the Curriculum Committee, as evidenced by the Committee’s Chairs signature, the Dean of Academic Affairs will place the new program request on the agenda for the next Faculty Assembly
Faculty Assembly Approval
The Curriculum Committee Chair will introduce the program at the Faculty Assembly with the in-person support of the program request author and appropriate Dean, answer any questions that may arise, and ask that they approve the program request. The Faculty Executive Committee Chair will sign the form on the Faculty Assembly’s behalf if approved. If approval is not granted, the Dean of Academic Affairs will develop a plan to address the group’s concerns with the program request author and appropriate Dean. The Dean of Academic Affairs will also alert the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness so that the timeline can be revised as necessary.
Board of Trustees Education Committee Consideration
The appropriate Dean will introduce the program at the Board of Trustees Education Committee meeting and request that they recommend approval to the full Board. The Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for developing a plan to address the group’s concerns with the program request author and appropriate Dean if the Committee declines to recommend.
Upon Request for New Program form approval by the Board of Trustees Education Committee, the Dean of Academic Affairs will place the new pro- gram request on the agenda for the next Board of Trustees meeting.
Board of Trustees Approval
The appropriate Dean will present the proposed program to the Board and ask that they approve the program request. The Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for signing the form on the Board of Trustees’ behalf if approved, and/or developing a plan to address the group’s concerns with the program request author and appropriate Dean. If approval is not granted, the Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for alerting the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness so that the timeline can be revised as necessary.
Upon Request for New Program form approval by the Board of Trustees, the Dean of Academic Affairs will ensure the form is forwarded to the Registrar for processing.
External Approvals and Notifications
National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD)
Plan Approval Development
The program request author will work with the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness, appropriate Dean, and Dean of Academic Affairs to develop the program Plan Approval document. The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness is responsible for requesting needed information from College collaborators (i.e. Library, Enrollment Services, Administration and Finance).
Consultative Review
The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness will send a firm draft of the Plan Approval to the President, all VPS, and all Deans approximately one month prior to the final submission date for editing and approval. The Dean of Academic Affairs will send this copy to the College’s NASAD liaison and request their consultation and input.
Plan Approval Submission
The program request author will work with the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness, appropriate Dean, and Dean of Academic Affairs to develop the pro- gram Plan Approval document. The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness is responsible for requesting needed information from College collaborators (i.e. Library, Enrollment Services, Administration and Finance).
Consultative Review
The Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness will send a firm draft of the Plan Approval to the President, all VPS, and all Deans approximately one month prior to the final submission date for editing and approval. The Dean of Academic Affairs will send this copy to the College’s NASAD liaison and request their consultation and input follows with a digital copy to the College’s NASAD Liaison.
The Dean of Academic Affairs will also send a program introduction email to College personnel who should be advised of the new program and its anticipated launch date at this time. The email will clearly state that the program is not yet accredited and cannot be discussed publicly. Recipients will include representatives from:
- Admissions and Enrollment Services
- Academic Advising and Registration
- Marketing and Communication
- Center for Tutoring and Learning
- Global Engagement
- Corporate Relations
- Career Development
- Housing
- Academic Facilities
- Financial Aid
Commission on Accreditation Response
NASAD typically offers a response from its Commission on Accreditation within 90 days of the Plan Approval submittal. The response will typically approve the program outright, approve the program with a request for a Progress Report(s) on concerning aspects, or defer the decision on approval based on major concerns. If a Plan Approval is deferred, the College has the right to provide a response to the concerns, but it typically will not be considered until the next review cycle.
Progress Reports
NASAD will sometimes request that the institution provide a Progress Report for one or more concerns outlined in their Commission on Accreditation written response. The deadlines for these Progress Reports are listed in the request. The Dean of Academic Affairs, Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness, appropriate Dean, and program request author will work together to create these documents.
Final Approval
When an undergraduate program graduates three students, or when a graduate program graduates two students, a Final Approval for Listing must be submitted to NASAD containing the transcripts for those students, published degree requirements, an explanation of any deviation between the published degree requirements and the transcripts, and a summary of any changes to the degree program since it was approved in the Plan Approval stage. The Dean of Academic Affairs, Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness, appropriate Dean, and program Chair will work together to create these documents.
Submission and Response Schedule
NASAD’s Commission on Accreditation meets every April and October. Any documentation submitted for consideration needs to be received by their office by the first of March or September. Commission on Accreditation responses are typically provided within 90 days of their meeting. If approval is not granted, the Dean of Academic Affairs is responsible for alerting the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness so that the timeline can be revised as necessary.
Higher Learning Commission (HLC)
Necessary Documentation
HLC categorizes new program proposals using their own metrics. Dependent on how the program is categorized, different documentation is required. The Dean of Academic Affairs, appropriate Dean, and Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness will determine the category and work with the program Chair to complete the necessary documentation.
Submission and Response Schedule
Submissions to HLC are accepted on a rolling basis. The length of response time expected is dependent on whether HLC determines that the decision can be made via desk review (up to 90 days), panel review (up to six months), or if a site visit is necessary (nine months). Site visits include a cost to the institution.
Department of Education
Necessary Documentation
The DOE must be notified of, and in some cases approve, all new programs or existing programs seeking to be offered in distance mode. The Vice President of Enrollment and Student Services is responsible for making this request to the DOE and submitting the appropriate documentation, including the program approvals from NASAD and HLC.
Submission and Response Schedule
Submissions to the DOE are made on a rolling basis. Responses may take up to 90 days.
Program Specific Accreditors
Programs may have discipline specific accreditors with their own requirements and standards. As these differ by organization, they are handled individually. Parties responsible for ensuring the program-specific accreditation reporting is completed include the appropriate program Chair, the appropriate Dean, the Dean of Academic Affairs, and the Director of Academic Planning & Effectiveness.
Assessment of New Programs
New Degree-Granting Academic Program Assessment
New Degree-Granting Academic Program Assessments are completed after the first year of program launch, and then again after the third year of program launch. The Dean of Academic Affairs works with new program Chairs and the appropriate Dean to schedule the assessments. Chairs are required to submit a dossier of documentation/evidence to the appropriate Dean in preparation for each of the reviews. New programs will submit the New Academic Program Assessment forms as part of their comprehensive review dossier at year six.
Institutional and Program Learning Outcomes
Each year, each degree-granting academic program completes an assessment of how well they delivered both an Institutional Learning Outcome (ILO) and a Program Learning Outcome (PLO) in their curricular content. These reports are submitted to the Assessment Committee at the close of each academic year.
Comprehensive and External Evaluator Reviews
The Assessment Committee offers a review of scheduled Comprehensive Review of academic programs every six years. Prior to the Review, the program creates a dossier of materials for consideration, similar to that which was created for the New Program reviews in the first and third years. The areas evaluated include program community development, institution community development, and progressive curricular strategies.
This Comprehensive Review will take place in the same year as the external review, in which an industry professional will perform a campus visit and consider student work outcomes and industry relevance.
Student, faculty, and staff focus groups would be convened as part of the review process to converse with the external evaluator and the Assessment Committee reviewers.
Student Course Evaluations
Each semester, students submit course evaluations that assess the effectiveness of their instructors and the course. Program Chairs consider these evaluations each semester and refine courses and offer faculty mentorship/training as needed
Faculty Evaluations
CCS full-time faculty are reviewed annually. Student outcomes and course evaluations are considered as part of this evaluation. New faculty, both full-time and adjunct, are evaluated twice in their first semester.
| Month Program Conversation Begins with Dean | College Leadership Approval | Curriculum Committee Consideration | Faculty Assembly Vote | Education Committee Consieration | Board of Trustees Vote | NASAD Submission^^ | NASAD Response* | HLC Submission | HLC Reponse** | DOE Submission | DOE Response*** | Promotion/ Recruiting Start Date^ | Program Launch | Total Months |
| January | February | March | April | April | May | Sept. | Nov. | Dec. | April FY | April FY | June FY | July FY | Sept. TY | 33 |
| February | March | April | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 32 |
| March | April | April | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 31 |
| April | May | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 30 |
| May | June | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 29 |
| June | July | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 28 |
| July | August | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 27 |
| August | Sept. | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 26 |
| September | October | October | Nov. | October | Dec. | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 25 |
| October | Nov. | Dec. | Jan. FY | Jan. FY | Feb. FY | March FY | May FY | June FY | Oct. FY | Oct. FY | Dec. FY | Jan. SY | Sept. TY | 24 |
| November | Dec. | Jan. FY | Feb. FY | April FY | May FY | Sept. FY | Nov. FY | Dec. FY | Mar. SY | Mar. SY | May SY | May SY | Sept. TY | 23 |
| December | Jan. FY | Jan. FY | Feb. FY | April FY | May FY | Sept. FY | Nov. FY | Dec. FY | Mar. SY | Mar. SY | May SY | May SY | Sept. TY | 22 |