Skip to content
Operations Manual The University of Iowa

PART II. COMMUNITY POLICIES
DIVISION I HUMAN RIGHTS, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

(Written to conform to Regents Procedural Guide 3/74; amended 9/93; 10/95; 9/97)

CHAPTER 28: ACADEMIC REVIEW

(President, upon recommendation of the Faculty Senate, 1981; amended 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2/16/93, Board of Regents 2/7/95; 2/07; 10/09)

28.1 General Purpose
28.2 Collegiate Review
28.3(1) Departmental and Program Review
28.3(2) Multi-Year Reviews of Departmental Executive Officers (DEO)s and Program Directors
28.4 Reviews of Central Administration
28.5 Multi-Year Academic Review of Administrators
28.6 Annual Review of Administrators

28.1 GENERAL PURPOSE.
(Amended 2/07)

The fundamental role of the academic review process is to aid the University community in its continual striving for excellence and efficiency in its teaching and research through systematic review of its performance and direction on every level-from that of departments and programs, through colleges, and ultimately to the University as a whole. The specific purposes of the review process include the following:

The benefits to be derived from academic reviews are varied and relate to all levels of the University. The process of preparing a self-assessment in itself can lead to new insights concerning functions, problems, needs, and future directions on the part of the academic unit or program. Service on review committees broadens the perspectives of faculty concerning the missions and interrelationships of departments, programs and colleges within the University. The results of reviews can provide one basis for determining departmental, collegiate and University priorities for program development and resource allocation. Finally, the review system represents the fundamental component of the University's long-range planning process through which the Board of Regents will assess the future needs and development of the institution. In sum, the academic review process plays a critical role in maintaining institutional vitality, planning, and improving the quality of our programs, facilities, staff, students, faculty, and administration. Therefore, the Executive Vice President and Provost will report annually to the Faculty Senate on the results of academic reviews, stressing the implications of reviews for planning at the University level.

The following policies and guidelines are meant to emphasize the need for clearly defining the various components of the review process and the procedures to be followed so as to make this process more widely understood and effective. In addition, these policies focus on the importance of a full consideration of the recommendations resulting from the review. These policies may be supplemented by policies and guidelines for academic program reviews, collegiate reviews, and decanal reviews that are developed by the Executive Vice President and Provost, in consultation with the Faculty Senate. Colleges are responsible for regular reviews of their departments and academic programs. Collegiate reviews of departments and programs should follow the policies and guidelines in this chapter, as supplemented by the policies and guidelines promulgated by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

Except for reviews of administrators for whom the President is responsible, the Executive Vice President and Provost shall have overall responsibility for monitoring the implementation of this section.

28.2 COLLEGIATE REVIEW.
(Amended 2/07)

28.3(1) DEPARTMENTAL AND PROGRAM REVIEW.
(Amended 2/07)

28.3(2) MULTI-YEAR REVIEWS OF DEPARTMENTAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS (DEOs) AND PROGRAM DIRECTORS.
(2/07; 10/09)

28.4 REVIEWS OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION. 28.5 MULTI-YEAR ACADEMIC REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATORS.
(Amended 2/07)

The procedures described in this section pertain to periodic reviews of central academic officers (President, Executive Vice President and Provost, vice presidents) and deans. These procedures do not pertain to the review of other academic officers reporting to central academic officers or to deans, which fall under II-28.6 below. Procedures for the review of departmental executive officers and program heads and directors are described above in II-28.3(2).

28.6 ANNUAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATORS.
Go forward one step to II-29 Hearing Regulations for Alleged Violations of Regents Rules
Or return to the Operations Manual Table of Contents, Index, or Search

Page last updated June 2013 by Office of the Senior Vice President for Finance and Operations