Practical Measures for Institutional Program Reviews - A Case Study of a Small Post-Secondary Institution

Oct 15, 2026

Post-secondary institutions conduct cyclical program reviews (CPRs) to evaluate educational effectiveness and strengthen teaching and learning through qualitative and quantitative analyses. Many CPR studies identify factors that support improvement, yet often fail to offer measures and indicators that are both relevant and actionable for institutional decision-making. This article aims to (1) identify measurable variables and cluster them for use across programs and (2) critically evaluate the indicators’ relevance in a small post-secondary setting.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Practical Measures for Institutional Program Reviews

Background and objectives

Institutional context and accreditation requirements

Institutional profile of Concordia University of Edmonton

Formal review process overview

Canadian Journal of Higher Education Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur Volume 49, No. 2, 2019, pages 54-71 Practical Measures for Institutional Program Reviews: A Case Study of a Small Post-Secondary Institution John Jayachandran Concordia University of Edmonton Colin Neufeldt Concordia University of Edmonton Elizabeth Smythe Concordia University of Edmonton Oliver Franke Concordia University of Edmonton Abstract Post-secondary institutions carry out cyclical program reviews (CPRs) to assess educational effectiveness. CPRs often use both qualitative and quantitative data analyses with the aim of improving teaching and learning. Though most of the CPR review studies identify various factors for this purpose, they fail to identify measures/indicators that are relevant and practical for the institutional decision-making process. Our main objectives for this article are two-fold: first, we identify and list variables that are measurable and sort them into clusters/groups that are relevant to all programs, and second, we critically assess the relevance of these indicators to program review in a small-sized, post-secondary institution. Résumé Les établissements universitaires conduisent des évaluations cycliques deleurs programmes afin de connaître leur efficacité et leur valeur pédagogique. CJHE / RCES Volume 49, No. 2, 2019 Practical Measures for Institutional Program Reviews / J. Jayachandran, C. P. Neufeldt, E. Smythe, & O. Franke 55 Dans ces évaluations cycliques, on se sert de méthodologies qualitatives et quantitatives dans le but d’améliorer l’enseignement et l’apprentissage. Bien que ces évaluations permettent souvent de déterminer un certain nombre defacteurs, ellesn’aident pas à trouverdes indicateurs ou des mesures pertinentset pratiques pour laprise dedécision internedes établissements universitaires. Notre article poursuit deux objectifs principaux. Premièrement, nous dressons une liste de facteurs mesurables et nous les catégorisons en thèmes ou groupes pertinentspour tousles programmes pédagogiques universitaires. Deuxièmement, nous évaluons l’intérêt que ces indicateurs peuvent avoir pour l’évaluation des programmes pédagogiques dans une petite université . Over the last two decades program review has become a topic of interest and debate among higher educational professionals and within higher education institutions (Halpern, 2013) . Program review is a critical component of self-examination, reflection, and continuous improvement in teaching and learning. It could be considered one of the most powerful and effective tools to shape and reshape an institution. The review process, in general, allows faculty in a particular program to evaluate the program’s effectiveness in serving students and achieving educational excellence. According to Bok (2006),“[t]hough the process of program review may not be perfect . . . program review, when thoughtfully carried out, is more reliable than hunches or personal opinions”(p. 320) . Provincial accreditation agencies have imposed rigorous assessment requirements on post-secondary institutions as part of their responsibilities to monitor degree programs to ensure that standards of quality continue to be met. As in many provinces, Alberta’s regulatory body, the Campus Alberta Quality Council (CAQC) is an arms-length quality assurance agency that reviews and recommends all Alberta post-secondary degree programs to the Minister of Advanced Education for approval (Campus Alberta Quality Council, 2019) . This case study draws upon the experiences of the article’s authors as faculty members who were participant observers in the process of conducting cyclical program reviews of three academic programs in a post-secondary institution, Concordia University of Edmonton (CUE), in 2015. Institutional Profile For almost 100 years, CUE has operated in Edmonton, Alberta on Treaty 6 territory. The university is a small, liberal arts institution

FAQs

What problem does the article address about program reviews?

It addresses that existing CPR studies often do not provide measures or indicators that are practical and relevant for institutional decision-making.

What are the two main objectives of the article?

First, identify measurable variables and group them into clusters relevant to all programs. Second, critically assess how relevant those indicators are for program review in a small post-secondary institution.

How do program reviews support educational improvement, according to the article?

Program reviews enable self-examination, reflection, and continuous improvement by helping programs evaluate how effectively they serve students and achieve educational excellence.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Danger Angel