NEW PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL POLICY

GSBMS New Program Development and Approval Process July, 1996

1. Initial proposal.

The proposers should prepare a brief (2 pages) summary of the new program's goals, rationale, target population, approximate curriculum, and a rough estimate of the resources required.

2. Triage.

The GSBMS Dean, Graduate Faculty Council, and Provost must agree that the proposal is acceptable for further development. This decision is based on whether the program fits the GSBMS and institutional missions, and whether there is a reasonable chance for fiscal viability. No approval is given, other than authorization to prepare a detailed proposal. The proposal can be vetoed at this stage, and should be if there is little or no chance of final approval.

3. Informal notification to New York State.

The dean should begin consultation with the NY State Education Department to ensure that the appropriate petitions are filed.

4. Detailed proposal.

The home department or interdepartmental group then prepares a detailed proposal for the new program, including the following specific elements:

A)  Program goals and rationale.

B)  Curriculum.

Existing courses.

New courses, identifying proposed course director and instructors, course goals, summary of content, format, textbook(s) or reading assignments, means of evaluating student performance, and relationship to existing similar courses. Some leeway will be allowed for the lack of specific information for courses projected for some time in the future, but sufficient information must be supplied to allow the Curriculum Committee to evaluate the academic value of each course.

C)   Student projections.

Who are the target students? How large is this pool?

How many students per year will be accepted? How many will be expected to graduate each year?

What admissions criteria will be used?

The potential demand for the new program must be justified and supported by objective data, including but not limited to the following:

1.  National, state, or regional employment and/or economic forecasts.

2.  Input from local or regional business groups, by survey or focus groups.

3.  Input from the potential student pool, by survey or focus groups.

D)   Program structure.

1)  Will a cohort structure be used or will students proceed at individual pace? How many credits per semester will be the normal load? What is a typical complete program, semester by semester? This information must be provided in a format that is both appropriate for assessing the academic structure of the program and also allows estimates of expected revenues.

2)  If the new program is an M.S. program, will it utilize a Plan A and/or a Plan B structure?

3)  Who will be the faculty for this program? Who will advise the students? Who will read literature reviews and/or theses?

4)  What is the proposed governance structure? E.g., will a specific department take responsibility, or will there be an interdepartmental steering committee, etc.?

E)  Will the program involve any collaborative arrangements or joint sponsorship by other institutions? Will any portion of the program occur off-site? If so, where? Such proposals must be justified academically and fiscally, and the relationship of the collaborative or off-site functions to the in-house governance structure must be clear and justified.

F)  What resources (manpower, space, fiscal) will be required?

G)  What is the projected balance between revenue and expenses?

A 5-year projection should be prepared.

H)  What outcome measures will be used to assess the success of the program? How will these data be gathered?

I)  The proposal should include any additional data required by the NY State Education Department.

5. Review by the Curriculum Committee.

The Curriculum Committee will assess the academic quality of the proposed new program. The committee can make a recommendation to the Graduate Faculty Council for approval of the program, make a recommendation for approval with a list of specific concerns that should be addressed or monitored, or refer the program back to the proposers for appropriate modification. The Curriculum Committee should base its review on the following general criteria.

A)  Overall program structure.

Is the program academically sound? Are the admissions criteria suitable and appropriate? Are the faculty appropriate for the program goals? Is the proposed program governance structure appropriate for maintaining academic quality? Is the use of adjunct faculty appropriate?

B)  Individual courses.

Do the individual courses have appropriate content? Is the level of the courses appropriate for M.S. or Ph.D. students? Do the courses incorporate sound principles of pedagogy and student performance evaluation? Has unnecessary duplication or overlap with existing courses been avoided?

N.B. The Curriculum Committee may require that specific new courses be submitted for individual review in the semester before they are offered for the first time. The course would be approved in principle during this program review, with final review and approval at the subsequent course review. This would be an appropriate action for new courses that, because of the long lag between their proposal and their initial offering, may be lacking important details at this first review.

C)  Academic resources.

Are there any concerns over the adequacy of resources, such as faculty manpower, library resources, laboratory space, etc.? If collaborative or off-site arrangements are proposed, are there appropriate safeguards to ensure that appropriate standards of academic quality are met?

6. Review by the dean.

The GSBMS dean will review the proposal concurrently with the Curriculum Committee. The dean will focus on the financial plan, the requirements for central administrative support, and outcomes assessment. The dean is expected to work with the proposers to resolve any problems in this area. The dean will prepare a report and recommendation on these matters for the Council.

1. Review by Graduate Faculty Council.

   The Council will review the detailed proposal. It can approve the program, reject the program, or send it back to the organizers for appropriate further modification. The Council should base its decision on the following general criteria.

   1. The recommendation of the Curriculum Committee.
   2. The dean's report and recommendation.
   3. The demand the new program will place on existing resources. The Council should give primary consideration to the required academic resources (faculty, laboratory space, etc.) and secondary consideration to student support resources (housing, stipends, etc.). The Council should take into account any new resources that may be supported by the program revenues.
   4. Does the proposed new program fit the GSBMS mission and goals?
   5. Does the fiscal plan for the program provide for fiscal stability?

8. Request for comment by support units.

The proposal should be distributed to appropriate support units for their comment. The specific units might vary with the nature of the program, but would generally include Student Affairs, Student Housing, Academic Computing, Medical Sciences Library, Student Health Services, Student Financial Aid, and Operations. These units would not approve or reject the proposed program, but would be asked to comment on whether there would be any problems fulfilling the needs of the new students. This step can be taken concurrently with the GFC Review, or even with the Curriculum Committee's and dean's reviews.

9. Review and Approval by the Provost.
10. Review and Approval by Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees.

Subsequent review and approval by the full Board may also be required.

11. Submission to and approval by the New York State Education Department.