The audit and review of undergraduate programs at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee was established by action of the Faculty Senate on April 17, 1975 (Fac. Doc. No. 907A; amended by Senate Executive Committee May 30, 1975). The authority for audit and review was vested in the Academic Program and Curriculum Committee (APCC), which is to perform its duties relevant to audit and review in cooperation with the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
Section I. Guidelines
- Exceptions. For undergraduate programs with specialized accreditation, the accreditation review meets the university’s requirement for program review. In these cases, the program should submit the following materials to the APCC:
- The self-study report as submitted to the accrediting body.
- The accrediting body’s review committee report/findings.
- Any response submitted by the program.
- A final summary from the dean or designee.
- Review Requirement. All other undergraduate programs not reviewed by specialized accreditors must be reviewed in accordance with this policy.
- Schedule for Review. Undergraduate programs shall be reviewed in accordance with the Program Review and Accreditation Schedule that can be found on the Academic Program and Curriculum Committee’s webpage (https://uwm.edu/secu/faculty/standing/apcc/).
Section II. Review Process
An undergraduate program review consists of the following steps:
Year before the review
- Program representatives attend informational meeting. Each fall, Academic Affairs and the APCC host an informational meeting for programs scheduled for review; the purpose of the meeting is to review guidelines and procedures. Department chairs and associate deans should plan to attend.
- Program representatives gather data. Appendix A lists the data we ask each program to examine as they write their self-study report. All of this data is available via the Program Analytics dashboard: https://uwm.edu/institutional-research/resources/analytics-dashboards/
- Program representatives write self-study report. The department follows the Program Self-Study Template in developing the self-study.
- Program representatives submit self-study report.
- The department submits the self-study to their Dean’s Office before the third week of April.
- The Dean reads the self-study, adds a cover letter, and submits the self-study and letter to Academic Affairs and APCC before the third week of May.
Year of the review
- APCC forms review committee. In the fall, the APCC appoints a three-member review committee. The chair of the review committee shall be a current member of the APCC. Other members of the committee may be drawn from the APCC, its Subcommittee on Undergraduate Program Reviews, or from UWM at large. The chair of the review committee will call the meetings of the review committee. The chair will also develop the site visit schedule in collaboration with the department chair.
- Committee conducts review. The review committee:
- Reviews the self-study, publicly available information (e.g., program website, catalog copy), and any additional materials provided by the program.
- Conducts a site visit, which consists of meetings with program faculty, staff, students, and other stakeholders as deemed appropriate (e.g., alumni, program advisory council, the Dean).
- Committee prepares review report. After the site visit, the review committee will prepare its report following the Program Review Report Template. The report should be submitted to APCC, the department chair, and the Dean within one month of the site visit and will recommend one of three outcomes and include a rationale:
- Program is in good standing and is recommended for continuation.
- Program is recommended for a follow-up review in three years. If a follow-up review is recommended, APCC will identify the area(s) of focus for the follow-up review.
- Program is recommended to consider suspending enrollment.
- Department/School/College prepares a response (optional). Within one month of receiving the review committee report, the department/school/college may submit a written response to APCC.
- APCC considers the review report and response. At its first scheduled meeting after the deadline for written response, APCC will consider the review report and response. It is expected that the process will be completed prior to the end of the Spring semester.
During the APCC’s discussion, the program being reviewed, along with the appropriate dean or director, shall have an opportunity to respond, orally and/or in writing, to the report and recommendations of the review committee and to propose amendments and modifications. - Provost’s Office meets with dean/designee. The VP for Academic Affairs meets with the school/college rep to discuss the APCC’s final report.
- Dean submits “action plan” to Provost’s Office detailing next steps arising from the findings of the review.
Section III. Follow-Up Review
Two years after closure of the full-scale review, the APCC Vice-Chair will contact the Department Chair or equivalent (Program Chair for interdisciplinary programs not housed in a single department) to obtain a progress report on implementation of the recommendations related to the focus area(s), which is then reported to the Committee. If the APCC finds that the progress toward implementation is not satisfactory, it shall consider appropriate recommendations and call for subsequent follow-up reports.
The APCC will also request a mid-cycle status report five years after the full-scale review. Programs that are professionally accredited could opt to synchronize the submission of the report with the re-accreditation report.
Follow-up reviews will be done as reviews of documents submitted by the program. There will be no site-visit as part of a follow-up review.
Revised by APCC
- September 2002
- December 2012
- December 2013
- February 2021
- May 2024
- October 2025