October 13, 2025 – Graduate Program Review Committee – Minutes

Posted on:

Time: Monday at 1:00 p.m. – 2:20 p.m.
Location: Microsoft Teams

Meeting was held online only via Teams

Joshua Mersky, 2025-2026 GPRC Chair

Members Present:   Alexa Anderson, Woonsup Choi, Itziar Lazkano, Joshua Mersky, Mark Netzloff, Krishna Pillai, Christopher Quinn, Erin Parcell, Ora John Reuter, Lorena Terando, Kay Wells

Absent:     Anne Pycha, Tiffany Nation, Graduate Programs Coordinator

Guests:     Lindsey McHenry (Former GPRC Committee Member); Douglas Ihrke (College of Letters & Science); Bryce Lord (College of Letters & Science); Cynthia Marifke (Graduate School); Victoria Moerchen (Ex-Officio, Graduate School); Bryan Porter (Graduate School Dean); Riley Harrison (Policies and Appeals Coordinator, Graduate School)

  1. Call to Order
    1:00 p.m.
  2. Announcements
    There were no announcements
  3. Automatic Consent
    The following meeting minutes were approved.
    1. Approval of meeting minutes from September 8, 2025
  4. Graduate Program Review External Reports:
    1. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, MS Graduate Program Review External Report (GPRC Doc No 2416)

      Mark Netzloff and Lindsey McHenry served as internal reviewers.  McHenry reported that the program has been running in some form for 19 years and is the only program of its kind in the state.  During the COVID pandemic, the program migrated to an online format that serves the needs of the program’s current students.  There are many students working in the professional field of nonprofit management and the flexibility offered by the online format seems to be well suited although there was never a formal decision to move to the online format.  The program received accreditation in 2019 and is scheduled for their next accreditation review in 2029.  Since the program started it has graduated 59 students.  The program has a great retention rate.  Not many of the faculty have real appointments within the program, the program pulls from expertise across campus from primary Lubar and the College of Letters and Science is the program’s department like entity.  The program is heavily reliant on its current director to run the program.  The program received an A rating of continuation without conditions from the external reviewer.  The external reviewer’s recommendation included terms on demands on faculty due to losses with retirement and departures, the heavy workload of the director and program specialist and business manager, the structural complexity of the program, and tying in the program with mico-credentials as a way to boost enrollments.  A strength of the program was their connection to the Helen Bader Institute and recommended to continue to build on this connection.

      Discussion followed.

      Motion to approve the report as written with a minor amendment in the internal report that would better highlight the value of the program to campus with the continuation of the graduate program for the next 10 years without conditions was motioned, seconded, and approved unanimously.
  5. Faculty Doc. No. 3197R1 Graduate Program Reviews (Procedures for Qualitative Reviews of Graduate Programs):
    1. Review recommended/suggested policy edits (Associate Dean Moerchen)

      Associate Dean Moerchen shared her recommended/suggested policy edits of clarifying and adding more detail to explain the accreditation review site visit process would count as the program review and the intent is to reduce duplicative work required of programs to put together the self-studies and reports for their accrediting body and to also meet the criteria in addition.  As well as removing the internal reviewers (IRT) responsibilities unless requested by the program to participate in the accreditation. 

      Moerchen provided historical details that we have always allowed the accreditation site visit to take the place of the graduate program review site visit that are organized through the Graduate School.

      Moerchen walked through each of the recommended/suggested policy edit with the committee and addressed their questions, suggestions, and concerns.

      Wells recommended that the possibility of the program representative being present at the GPRC meeting when the accreditation final report are on the agenda and to add additional language concerning the IRT’s responsibilities to be of assistance between the program and accrediting body and be able to address any issues of the report and to be able to compose a written memo to address those issues.

      Discussion took place.

      Moerchen will address the recommended suggested edits of the committee to the revised policy, and the revisions will be sent to the committee and will be reviewed at the November 10th meeting.  She asked the committee to review the appendices of the policy for any recommended suggestions.
  6. 2025 – 2026 Virtual Graduate Program Review Site Visit Committee Member Assignments
    GPRC Chair Mersky informed the committee that of three program reviews for the 2025 – 2026 academic year and that he has assigned Parcell and Lazkano to the Engineering, MS/PhD program reviews scheduled for November 2025.  There are two program reviews that will be assigned and shared at the next meeting.
  7. Other Business
    There was no other business.
  8. Adjourn
    2:28 p.m.