Skip to content
 Scroll To Top


UAS has strategically placed self-assessment at the heart of its activities. Through this commitment to continuous self-reflection and improvement, UAS has developed a culture of assessment that guides decision-making institution-wide. A key facet of UAS’s assessment activities is assessing student achievement of pre-defined learning outcomes. The process starts with the development of learning outcomes assessment plans for each academic program, followed by plan implementation, reporting, and ultimately looping back the insights gained from this process into program improvements.

Program reviews, required by Board of Regents policy, are an integral part of our practice to ensure that we meet UAS’s mission. Reviews focus on data-informed evidence of quality teaching and learning, graduation effectiveness, success of graduates in securing employment or advancing their educational goals, community engagement, adequacy of available resources, alignment with related programs at UAS and across UA, and program elements requiring improvement.  

Key Documents

Review Calendar

The deadline dates will be established by the Provost as reviews are commissioned and review committees are appointed. This calendar shows the months in which various review actions are to take place. 

Review Calendar
March 15The Dean/Directors identify a lead person to conduct the review.
September 4UAS Institutional Effectiveness (IE) provides data for all programs that relates to the sections of the review format.
November 14The Program committee completes and submits initial detailed program review document and materials to the department chair.
November 28The Department Chair submits the Program Committee's program review document (Program Review) to the Dean/Director for completeness.
December 5The Dean/Director forwards the Program Review to the Provost's Office. The Provost forwards the Program Review to the Institutional Review Committee (IRC)* for review.
February 5The IRC sends its report and recommendations (IRC Report) to the Provost. The report must provide one of the following recommendations: continuation without change, continuation with change, or discontinuation. The Provost forwards the IRC Report to the Program committee
February 19The Program committee submits a response to the IRC Report to the Dean/Director for review.
March 12The Dean/Director sends the Program Review and the IRC Report reviews to the Provost.
April 2The Provost provides final recommendations to the Chancellor based upon the program review process.

* Institutional Review Committee selected by the Provost

Format for Review

The data used in the review shall consist of the materials from program faculty and UAS IE.

Please use this draft outline to assist in the clarity of the review. This format is pending Faculty Senate approval (posted 9/14/2018).

The program review procedures were developed based on the following University of Alaska Board of Regents policy and regulations.

Board of Regents - Academic Program Review Policy (P10.06.010)

Board of Regents - Academic Program Review Regulations (R10.06.010)

Program reviews assist the faculty, dean, and the university administration in:

  • evaluating the contribution of the program to the mission of the university;
  • evaluating the contribution of the program to the community;
  • evaluating the degree to which the program is achieving its educational goals;
  • identifying the relative strengths and weaknesses of the program;
  • developing plans and priorities for the future of the program;
  • providing appropriate recognition to the program;
  • determining need for change or program improvement; and
  • evaluating the value of the program to the State of Alaska.

Content maintained by the Office of the Provost.