Scholarly Research Excellence

Digital Open Science Index

Commenced in January 2007 Frequency: Monthly Edition: International Publications Count: 29010


Select areas to restrict search in scientific publication database:
10009451
A Holistic Conceptual Measurement Framework for Assessing the Effectiveness and Viability of an Academic Program
Abstract:
In today’s very competitive higher education industry (HEI), HEIs are faced with the primary concern of developing, deploying, and sustaining high quality academic programs. Today, the HEI has well-established accreditation systems endorsed by a country’s legislation and institutions. The accreditation system is an educational pathway focused on the criteria and processes for evaluating educational programs. Although many aspects of the accreditation process highlight both the past and the present (prove), the “program review” assessment is "forward-looking assessment" (improve) and thus transforms the process into a continuing assessment activity rather than a periodic event. The purpose of this study is to propose a conceptual measurement framework for program review to be used by HEIs to undertake a robust and targeted approach to proactively and continuously review their academic programs to evaluate its practicality and effectiveness as well as to improve the education of the students. The proposed framework consists of two main components: program review principles and the program review measurement matrix.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

References:

[1] Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). http://www.abet.org/ Accessed on: September 30, 2017.
[2] Anderson, S. B., & Ball, S. (1978). The profession and practice of program evaluation. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1978.
[3] APU (2014). Program Review Handbook - Eighth Edition, revisions approved January 21, 2014 Center for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, 2014. Retrieved on September 30, 2017 from https://www.apu.edu/live_data/files/333/program_review_handbook.pdf.
[4] Barak, R. (1982). Program Review in Higher Education: Within and Without. National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.
[5] Blaikie, Fiona; Hensman, Linda; MacKinnon, Scott; Mandzuk, David (2014). Academic Program Review MUN - Faculty of Education. December 2014. Retrieved from http://www.mun.ca/vpacademic/APR/ED_2015_PanelReport.pdf on September 30, 2017.
[6] Bresciani M. J. (2006). “Outcomes-based Academic and Co-Curricular Program Review: A Compilation of Institutional Good Practices”. Stylus Publishing, LLC. ISBN 1-57922-140-8. 2006
[7] Bulmetis, J. and Dutwin, P. (2011), “The ABCs of Evaluation: timeless techniques for program and project managers”, third edition, San Francisco 2011.
[8] Collins, J. (2005). Good to Great and the Social Sectors: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great, p. 1. New York: Harper Collins, 2005.
[9] Conrad, C. & Wilson, R. (1985). Academic program reviews: Institutional approaches, expectations, and controversies. Ashe-Eric Higher Education Report, 5.
[10] Dickeson, Robert (2009). Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services: Reallocating Resources to Achieve Strategic Balance. Revised & Updated. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
[11] The Hanover Research Council (HRC) (2009). “Models Used to Determine Academic Program Costs and Viability”. Retrieved on September 30, 2017 from http://www.planning.salford.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/20765/Models-Used-to-Determine-Academic-Program-Costs-and-Viability-Membership.pdf.
[12] Konstantinos, A. and Efrosini, K. (2003). Program Evaluation Methodologies. A comparative Assessment. Retrieved on September 30, 2017 from http://www.prd.uth.gr/uploads/discussion_papers/2003/uth-prd-dp-2003-17_en.pdf.
[13] Lagos, D. and Lainos, D. (2000). The Scientific Approach of Greek Regional Planners Association for the Evaluation of Developmental Programs, in Preceding Evaluation of Operational Programs-Means-Methods-Techniques, Greek Regional Planners Association, Athens, 2000.
[14] The Macau University of Science and Technology, Retrieved from http://www.must.edu.mo/en/qa-en/program-review/undergraduate/what-is-a-program-review on September 30, 2017.
[15] Majdalawieh, M., Antero, M., Bataineh, E., and Tubaishat, A. (2016). “A New Innovative Undergraduate Degree Program in Enterprise Computing at Zayed University: Successes, Challenges, and Future Directions”. Amity Journal of Training and Development, Volume I, Issue 1, 2016.
[16] Richards, Mary P., and C. W. Minkel (1986). "Assessing the quality of higher education through comprehensive program review." Edited by TW Banta (1986): 95-102.
[17] Patton M. Q. (1986). Utilization – Focused Evaluation, Sage: London, 1986.
[18] Patton M. Q. (1995). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, London: Sage. 1995.
[19] Satterlee, Brian (1992). Program Review and Evaluation: A Survey of Contemporary Literature. ERIC, ERIC Number ED356261, December 1992.
[20] Slimmer, Virginia McKinley, "Evaluating a program in higher education: a conceptual process and its application " (1981). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. Paper 6854.
[21] Stufflebeam, D., Foley, W. J., Gephart, W. J., Guba, E. G., Hammond. R. I., Merriman, H. 0., and Provus, M. M. (1971). Educational Evaluation and Decision-Making. Peacock Publishers, Itasca, Illinois, 1971.
Vol:12 No:11 2018Vol:12 No:10 2018Vol:12 No:09 2018Vol:12 No:08 2018Vol:12 No:07 2018Vol:12 No:06 2018Vol:12 No:05 2018Vol:12 No:04 2018Vol:12 No:03 2018Vol:12 No:02 2018Vol:12 No:01 2018
Vol:11 No:12 2017Vol:11 No:11 2017Vol:11 No:10 2017Vol:11 No:09 2017Vol:11 No:08 2017Vol:11 No:07 2017Vol:11 No:06 2017Vol:11 No:05 2017Vol:11 No:04 2017Vol:11 No:03 2017Vol:11 No:02 2017Vol:11 No:01 2017
Vol:10 No:12 2016Vol:10 No:11 2016Vol:10 No:10 2016Vol:10 No:09 2016Vol:10 No:08 2016Vol:10 No:07 2016Vol:10 No:06 2016Vol:10 No:05 2016Vol:10 No:04 2016Vol:10 No:03 2016Vol:10 No:02 2016Vol:10 No:01 2016
Vol:9 No:12 2015Vol:9 No:11 2015Vol:9 No:10 2015Vol:9 No:09 2015Vol:9 No:08 2015Vol:9 No:07 2015Vol:9 No:06 2015Vol:9 No:05 2015Vol:9 No:04 2015Vol:9 No:03 2015Vol:9 No:02 2015Vol:9 No:01 2015
Vol:8 No:12 2014Vol:8 No:11 2014Vol:8 No:10 2014Vol:8 No:09 2014Vol:8 No:08 2014Vol:8 No:07 2014Vol:8 No:06 2014Vol:8 No:05 2014Vol:8 No:04 2014Vol:8 No:03 2014Vol:8 No:02 2014Vol:8 No:01 2014
Vol:7 No:12 2013Vol:7 No:11 2013Vol:7 No:10 2013Vol:7 No:09 2013Vol:7 No:08 2013Vol:7 No:07 2013Vol:7 No:06 2013Vol:7 No:05 2013Vol:7 No:04 2013Vol:7 No:03 2013Vol:7 No:02 2013Vol:7 No:01 2013
Vol:6 No:12 2012Vol:6 No:11 2012Vol:6 No:10 2012Vol:6 No:09 2012Vol:6 No:08 2012Vol:6 No:07 2012Vol:6 No:06 2012Vol:6 No:05 2012Vol:6 No:04 2012Vol:6 No:03 2012Vol:6 No:02 2012Vol:6 No:01 2012
Vol:5 No:12 2011Vol:5 No:11 2011Vol:5 No:10 2011Vol:5 No:09 2011Vol:5 No:08 2011Vol:5 No:07 2011Vol:5 No:06 2011Vol:5 No:05 2011Vol:5 No:04 2011Vol:5 No:03 2011Vol:5 No:02 2011Vol:5 No:01 2011
Vol:4 No:12 2010Vol:4 No:11 2010Vol:4 No:10 2010Vol:4 No:09 2010Vol:4 No:08 2010Vol:4 No:07 2010Vol:4 No:06 2010Vol:4 No:05 2010Vol:4 No:04 2010Vol:4 No:03 2010Vol:4 No:02 2010Vol:4 No:01 2010
Vol:3 No:12 2009Vol:3 No:11 2009Vol:3 No:10 2009Vol:3 No:09 2009Vol:3 No:08 2009Vol:3 No:07 2009Vol:3 No:06 2009Vol:3 No:05 2009Vol:3 No:04 2009Vol:3 No:03 2009Vol:3 No:02 2009Vol:3 No:01 2009
Vol:2 No:12 2008Vol:2 No:11 2008Vol:2 No:10 2008Vol:2 No:09 2008Vol:2 No:08 2008Vol:2 No:07 2008Vol:2 No:06 2008Vol:2 No:05 2008Vol:2 No:04 2008Vol:2 No:03 2008Vol:2 No:02 2008Vol:2 No:01 2008
Vol:1 No:12 2007Vol:1 No:11 2007Vol:1 No:10 2007Vol:1 No:09 2007Vol:1 No:08 2007Vol:1 No:07 2007Vol:1 No:06 2007Vol:1 No:05 2007Vol:1 No:04 2007Vol:1 No:03 2007Vol:1 No:02 2007Vol:1 No:01 2007