Skip to main content
Undergraduate Education Undergraduate Education
  1. Undergraduate Education
  2. Resources
  3. Administrative Reviews

Procedures for Administrative Review of New Academic Programs

Currently, proposals for new academic programs are submitted to the appropriate Academic Senate committee (Graduate or Undergraduate Council and, for graduate programs, Planning and Budget); these committees are charged with evaluating the academic aspects of these programs, but often lack sufficient information to evaluate programs’ resource requirements. In addition, the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC) now requires that new programs (graduate programs and undergraduate majors) undergo a screening process to determine whether they involve a substantive change (in which case, they would require a WSCUC substantive change review). The below administrative process has been implemented to facilitate WSCUC screening, and to ensure that resource implications are documented consistently to inform Academic Senate review.

Contents of Proposals for New Programs

Contents of proposals to establish new undergraduate and graduate academic programs (any programs requiring Senate review, e.g., majors, minors, specializations, and certificates) and for the approval of new remote degree programs will go through three phases:
 
Phase One: Preparation and Planning Process
Phase Two: Collection of Proposal Requirements
Phase Three: Routing the Proposal Package through the automated Administrative Review Form
 
** Please note that curricular revisions do not require this additional administrative review process unless they require substantial additional resources (FTE/teaching materials) that the department/program is unable to self-fund or represent curricular changes of 25% or more. 

Phase One: Preparation and Planning Process

Planning Process 

The Planning Process for Undergraduate Programs

Visual--NAPAR-Process4.png

Overview of the Planning Process:

  1. The Department Chair submits the draft proposal to Divisional/School Dean (or College Provost), the academic VC(s) Resource Administration Office(s) for resource analysis, and, for online or hybrid programs, the Teaching + Learning Commons Digital Learning Hub.
  2. The Divisional/School Dean (or College Provost) confirms resource requirements (e.g. space, faculty, administrative support, etc.); any additional commitments are documented with a formal letter, which is included in the proposal and communicated to the appropriate academic VC(s).
  3. Any additional resource commitments from the academic VC(s) are documented with a formal letter, which is included in the proposal and communicated to the Divisional/School Dean (or College Provost).
  4. The final proposal is approved by the Divisional/School Dean (or College Provost).
  5. The final proposal is then submitted through the automated Administrative Review Form where all necessary approvers will review and approve the proposal. Once the EVC approves, the proposal is submitted to the Academic Senate with the approval cover sheet (showing that all necessary reviewers have signed off).

Programs should allow one month for the above steps; additional time may be required if revision is required. Once the form is submitted to the Senate, the following happens:

  • The Dean of Undergraduate Education initiates WSCUC substantive change screening.
  • The Undergraduate Council communicates with the Department Chair regarding proposal approval, questions, etc.
  • If approved by the Undergraduate Council, the program is approved.
  • If the WSCUC screening determines that a substantive change review is required, the Dean of Undergraduate Education oversees the review application, and will communicate with the Department Chair on any next steps.

 

Phase Two: Collection of Proposal Requirements

Proposals created to establish new undergraduate academic programs (any programs requiring Senate review, e.g., majors, minors, specializations, and certificates) and for the approval of new remote degree programs will include the following documents:

 

  1. Academic Senate Required Materials for New Undergraduate Majors and Minors:

 

  1. Required WSCUC Screening Form:

Institutions planning to implement new degree programs, or new specializations must submit a screening form to determine if a Substantive Change review and approval is necessary prior to implementation. The Division of Undergraduate Education will submit all information to our accrediting agency (WSCUC) and will communicate with the Department Chair on any next steps. For questions or guidance on the form, please reach out to Hailey Caraballo at hlcaraballo@ucsd.edu.

 

  1. Budget Proposal:
A budget proposal prepared in collaboration with the Resource Administration Office(s) for the lead academic VC and in consultation with the Resource Administration Office(s) of other involved academic VCs. For self-supporting programs, see http://academicaffairs.ucsd.edu/sso/SAPD/Resources/FinancialModelTool

 

  1. Documenting Letters:
Letters documenting any additional resource commitments from the Divisional/School Dean and/or academic VC(s).

Phase Three: Automated Administrative Routing Form

When the proposal is ready to submit, the unit will submit all documents to the
Automated Administrative Review Form (New Academic Program Administrative Review Form):

New Academic Programs: Administrative Review Form

The form automatically sends the proposal to all necessary reviewers. A system-generated status log is provided to Academic Senate and the original submitter. It documents routing of the proposal and approvals, according to the appropriate routing order- from the Chair, to the Divisional/School Dean, to the Undergraduate Dean and to the appropriate academic VCs (EVC-AA, VC-HS, and/or VC-MS, depending on program details). Online and/or hybrid programs also require approval from the Digital Learning Hub, within the Teaching + Learning Commons (secured prior to routing to the Divisional/School Dean). Interdisciplinary programs should be reviewed by and signatures obtained from each Dean and Chair.

 

 Departments should plan on approximately one month for this review. Please note that additional time may be required if significant revisions are required.

A PDF of the Procedure Details