Graduate Policy Committee (GPC) Review Process

The purpose of the GPC program reviews is (1) to ensure that FSU's graduate programs are academically sound and are producing graduates who are adequately trained in their field and (2) to assist the program administration and faculty in improving the academic quality of their graduate program. The GPC Review Subcommittees will base their report on the materials provided for the Provost's review, for the GPC specifically, and, where appropriate, for the FBOG reviewer and/or accrediting agencies, as well as additional discussions with the chair of the program, faculty, and graduate students. The GPC subcommittee will also look at sample dissertations. The program review subcommittee will be responsible for making recommendations to the GPC. Their report will be presented to a meeting of the full GPC for discussion and final approval. Recommendations are made on (1) whether the program should be continued; and (2) any other recommendations aimed at improving the academic quality of the program deemed appropriate by the review subcommittee. Once approved by the GPC, the recommendations will be forwarded to the unit being reviewed, the dean of that unit, the Dean of the Faculties' Office, and the Provost's Office.

In summary, review of the program by both the GPC Review Subcommittee and the GPC will be based on the following:

Information prepared for the Provost and for external reviewers
External reviewer's reports, where applicable
Information on the quality of the graduate programs (see revised questions following this section that are to be included in the self-study)
Dissertation reviews by review subcommittee members
Faculty vitas (see p. 4, 6.d.)
The following meetings:

of the chair of the review subcommittee with the chair of the program
of the review subcommittee or selected subcommittee member(s) with the faculty and external reviewers and the Associate Vice Presidents for Academic Affairs together or separately
of the review subcommittee or selected subcommittee member(s) with external reviewers (this meeting may be combined with the meeting with departmental faculty where appropriate)
of the review subcommittee or selected subcommittee member(s) with graduate students

Other items the review subcommittee may request

Follow-Up Process

Six months after the semester in which the review was completed, the program submits a written plan for how the GPC recommendations will be met. The plan is submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies and reviewed by both the Dean of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the GPC. Two years after the semester in which the review was completed, the program submits a written report on how the GPC recommendations were met. This report is submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies and reviewed by both the Dean of Graduate Studies and the Chair of the GPC. If deemed necessary, further follow-up is initiated by the Dean of Graduate Studies.

Quality Enhancement Review: Revised GPC Self-Study Questions

Measure/Topic	Narrative and Analysis	Tables and Supporting Documents
GPC 1. Recruitment/ Enrollment/ Retention/ Graduation data for all graduate degrees	1. Comment on the size of the graduate program and any trends in the graduate program statistics. Does the program's size create problems, is program growth (or shrinkage) a goal? Is retention a problem? 2. Comment on the diversity of the student body (gender and ethnicity). 3. Describe how recruiting is done. Include recruitment documents (brochures, etc.) and/or address for materials posted on the web. 4. If the department operates graduate certificate programs or offers large graduate service courses these should be described.	1. Provide chart of numbers of students applying, admitted, enrolled, graduated, numbers who drop out, time to degree, and GRE and GPA scores (or other appropriate metrics) and gender and ethnicity of enrolled students over the last five years. Data should be separated by degree (but may be combined if most appropriate). 2. Provide a list of Doctoral graduates for the last 5 years with dissertation title and name of major professor.
GPC 2. Placement data, and other quality indicators of the graduate programs	1. Report on placement of masters and doctoral graduates for the past five years. 2. Comment on the data on graduate student publications/creative works, presentations, awards, fellowships and other quality indicators. 3. Comment on any contact with or outreach efforts to alumni.	1. Provide a chart of masters and doctoral recipients for the last five years, numbers of publications and presentations or other quality indicators (awards and fellowships, etc) for each student, and information on student placement. 2. For the doctoral graduates list their dissertation titles and major professor.
GPC 3. Curriculum	1. Comment on the currency and adequacy of the curriculum. Are there difficulties in course scheduling and availability, enrollments. Describe the faculty teaching loads. 2. Will distance learning play a role in your enrollment planning at either the undergraduate or graduate level?	1. For each degree and majors within the degree, provide a chart or table showing elements of the curriculum, include a plan of study and indicate what are core courses and commonly chosen electives. 2. Provide a list of all the courses offered in the last five years, when they were offered, name of the instructor, and enrollment in each.
GPC 4. Advising and professional preparation of graduate students	1. Explain how student advising is done. 2. Describe the "milestone steps" in the degree program (diagnostic exams, preliminary exams, prospectus, etc) and how these are administered. What are the success rates on these exams? 3. Provide statement on professional preparation of students for academic or non-academic roles including teaching and research.	Include a copy of the departmental handbook for graduate students or a web link to the handbook.
GPC 5. Resources for graduate training.	1. Explain how students are supported, comment on the fraction of students supported on personal funds, teaching assistantships and grants and fellowships. Give stipend levels and comment on how they compare with national averages and how student funding impacts the program's quality indicators. Are there trends in the support data over the last five years? 2. Provide statements on space facilities, equipment, library and other resources available to graduate students. Are there facilities and resources needed for students in the program that are not currently available or are difficult to access? If so, are their plans for obtaining these resources?	Provide a table showing how the student's were funded (TAs, grants, fellowship, personal funds, etc.) for each of the five years covered by the review.
GPC 6. Faculty Research/Creative Activity	Comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the faculty's research/creative activities.	Provide full CVs (in official FSU format) for all program faculty (do not print them but provide a CD or a link to a website with all the vitas collected together) (see p. 4, 6.d.).
GPC 7. Summary of program strengths and weaknesses	Comment on data specific to graduate education. What particular strengths, weaknesses, concerns do the data in GPC 1-6 indicate? (For example, what do admission rates, and the demographics and stated goals of the admitted students indicate about the strength of the program)?