Reason For Action
AIM Statement
Create and evolve the academic program review process and academic portfolio performance framework.
Key Requirements
Solution must include:
- A USU academic program review and portfolio management process that aligns with USHE expectations, allocates resources appropriately, and informs USU’s mission.
- Track and report on student employment outcomes.
- Solutions must balance mission and financial sustainability.
- Academic program portfolio evaluation must be transparent and evidence-based.
- Cost-per-program transparency model
- Faculty workload alignment recommendations
- Accountability for improvement is clear
- Program viability and ROI standards
- Future-state academic portfolio design principles
Multi-Year Initiative Roadmap
Project Kitty Hawk: While design teams work on specific charters, ODA and the Provost's Office will pilot the entire system with one department from each college. ODA will work with deans to select pilot departments.
Year 1 - Pilots & Foundations
- Data infrastructure and analytics job architecture
- Evaluative process for teaching and student success
- Post-graduation outcomes tracking and reporting
- Aggies Impact Scorecard development
- Implementing Academic Plans: Process After Receiving Aggies Impact Scorecard
Year 2 - Gathering Input, Sharing Widely
- Professional development for data literacy and academic planning
- Develop and launch annual academic portfolio forum
- Create process to incentivize interdisciplinary program development and collaboration
Year 3 - Full Launch
- Full cycle launch
Year 1 Initiatives (Design Events)
The summit identified a pilot initiative and four Year 1 design events. Each has a draft charter with problem and aim statements and scope boundaries.
| Initiative | Problem Addressed | Aim |
|---|---|---|
| Project Kitty Hawk (Pilot Run) | USU cannot wait three years to begin implementing its new program review process. Instead, we will fly the plane while its being developed. Like the first flight in Kitty Hawk N.C., USU will launch its new program review process this year with one department from each college. | Conduct a test run of the process using the minimum analyses, processes, and people necessary to test the concept, learn from failure, and integrate findings into future development. |
| Aggie Impact Scorecard | Academic program performance data is difficult to access, understand, trust, and apply towards program and portfolio analysis. Some data is not systematically gathered (civic impact, research, learning). Institutional capacity and resources for this activity are scattered and lack a standardized approach to data use and application. | Create a decision-support technology (analytics application) that facilitates and provides meaningful insights for academic program review process and maintains a well-aligned and strategic academic portfolio. |
| Data-informed Teaching, Learning, and Student Success | There is currently no sufficient framework for assessing student learning and success. We lack relevant metrics for ensuring learning objectives are met, instructional quality is achieved, and meaningful experiential learning occurs. We need teaching evaluation process that is more robust and clearly defines teaching effectiveness. | To create an evaluation process for teaching, learning, and student success. This process should be meaningful for every instructor and student type. |
| Post-Graduation Outcomes (In process) |
We do not have a standard and scalable process for understanding what happens to students after graduation across all programs and degree levels. Existing data sources are often incomplete, delayed, decentralized, or difficult for departments to use as part of ongoing improvement efforts. At the same time, expectations from students, employers, policymakers, and accrediting bodies increasingly require universities to demonstrate the long-term value and effectiveness of academic programs. |
By Spring 2027, establish and pilot a university-wide framework for tracking and using post-graduation outcomes data, including student wages, employment, occupational alignment, and graduate school participation, across participating academic programs. |
| Implementing Academic Plans, including growing, consolidating, and discontinuing academic programs | After academic planning is complete, we must have clear institutional processes to allocate the necessary resources and track successful execution. | Create a process for what happens after deciding on programmatic status, including establishing guiding principles for how labels are assigned to programs. Resource allocation for each designation must be developed and defined. |
Meet the Team
Executive Sponsors
Paul Barr
Vice Provost
Jeff Aird
Chief Data & Analytics Officer
Facilitators
- Design Summit Facilitator: Nicole Schrubb, Executive Director of Talent Management and Organizational Effectiveness
- Design Events Facilitator: Jillian Morley, Organizational Development Specialist III
Team
| Name | Title | Location |
|---|---|---|
| Brad Lindsey | Associate Dean — Huntsman School of Business | Logan |
| David Law | Associate Vice President - Uintah Basin | Vernal |
| Deepak Keshwani | Associate Dean & Professor - Engineering | Logan |
| Mateja Savoie Roskos | Associate Dean for Academic Programs — QCANR | Logan |
| Ravi Gupta | Department Head — History, Culture & Ideas | Logan |
| Shelly Kotynek | Executive Director University & Exploratory Advising | Logan |
| Sylvia Read | Associate Dean of Accreditation & Undergrad - CEHS | Logan |
| Todd Griffith | Faculty Senate President | Logan |
| Zak Konakis | Interim Dept Head — TDTE & Regional Pathways Coordinator | Price |