SPR Home

University News Office of Communications University of Saskatchewan E280 Administration Building 105 Administration Place Saskatoon, SK    S7N 5A2 Tel: (306) 966-6607    Fax: (306) 966-6815 http://www.usask.ca/communications/ U of S Announces Latest Outcome of Program Reviews

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - April 18th, 2002

Today the University of Saskatchewan announced the latest outcomes of Systematic Program Review (SPR) *, a major six-year review cycle that is improving the quality of education delivered to students.

Established by the University Council in 1999, SPR is designed to encourage program improvement and innovation, demonstrate accountability, and provide information to guide decisions about programs and resources. Each review includes a self-study by the program, a site visit and report by external reviewers, responses from Deans and program heads, decisions on outcome categories, and action-plans to implement the recommendations.

In 2000-01, SPR looked at graduate programs in Education, all programs in Law and Nursing, and two undergraduate interdisciplinary programs in the College of Arts and Science. Programs were evaluated according to quality (of curriculum, faculty, learning environment, infrastructure and outcomes), demand, efficiency in the use of resources and relevance to the province.

There are four possible outcome categories: A (outstanding programs; few, if any, changes required); B (some improvements needed; program will be sustained); C (fundamental changes required; concrete action plan must be developed to address deficiencies); and D (requirement to consider termination). **

Of the programs reviewed in 2000-2001, 8 were rated B and 3 were rated C.

"We can take pride in the good, solid Bs we achieved this year and we're already working together to address the issues raised by the Cs," said University Vice-President Academic and Provost, Michael Atkinson.

"Most universities carry out reviews of this sort in order to maintain academic quality," he added. "The standards the U of S has set for itself are quite ambitious. We've had external reviewers recruited from some of the best universities in North America and abroad-including one from Australia last year-and they've told us many of our programs are in a league with the strongest post-secondary institutions in North America."

Recommendations from the 2000-01 reviews are already leading to improvements. For example, the College of Arts and Science has established a new Office of Interdisciplinary Studies to provide support and a 'home' for interdisciplinary programs.

And Beth Horsburgh, Dean of Nursing, is excited about recruiting eight new faculty members for the Nursing Education Program of Saskatchewan (NEPS) - positions supported by the results of SPR.

"Our SPR national reviewers reported that NEPS was "cutting edge" and referred to the students as "brilliant". They noted that the NEPS is one of only a few Canadian BSN programs based upon the principles of primary health care. The findings of the SPR team have lent great support to the College's need for more faculty to accommodate increased student enrollment in the NEPS."

The 1999-2000 reviews are also yielding results. Major program revisions and mergers are underway, as well as initiatives to enhance the student experience and encourage research. Ernie Barber, Dean of Agriculture, said: "We learned a lot from the SPR process. Students entering our undergraduate and graduate programs in 2002 will benefit from several significant improvements in areas of strategic importance that will help us to be a preferred place in Canada for agricultural education."

Reviews are currently underway for engineering and natural sciences, and preparation has begun for next year's reviews in education, music, commerce and the social sciences.

For further information, contact:

General information:
Michael Atkinson
Vice-President Academic and Provost
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-8484

Information from Deans taking part in the 2000-2001 SPRs:
Beth Horsburgh
Dean, College of Nursing
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-6223

Beth Bilson (after April 22)
Dean, College of Law
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-5910

Ken Coates
Dean, College of Arts and Science
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-4232

Ken Jacknicke
Dean College of Education
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-7647

Information from Deans taking part in the 1999-2000 SPRs:
Ernie Barber
Dean, College of Agriculture
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-4050

Dennis Gorecki
Dean, College of Pharmacy & Nutrition
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-6328

Lynne Pearson
Dean, College of Commerce
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-4786

Information on Council decision:
Jene Porter
Chair, Planning Committee of Council
University of Saskatchewan
(306) 966-5218

---

**Outcomes of programs reviewed in 2000/2001
ARTS AND SCIENCE (Interdisciplinary)
Land Use and Environmental Studies (LUEST)
C	BA, BSc in Land Use and Environmental Studies (LUEST)
Regional and Urban Development (RUD)
B	BA in Regional and Urban Development (RUD)
EDUCATION
Educational Administration
B	GRAD PGD, MEd, PhD in Educational Administration
Educational Foundations
B	GRAD PGD, MEd (three strands) in Educational Foundations
B	MCEd in Educational Foundations
Curriculum Studies
C	GRAD PGD, MEd in Curriculum Studies
LAW
B	LLB in Law
C	Grad LLM in Law
NURSING
B	BSN (NEPS) in Nursing
B	BSN (Post-Registration) in Nursing
B	GRAD MN in Nursing

*Systematic Program Review

The Systematic Program Review (SPR) process was approved by Council in principle in 1994 and in detail in February 1999. It maps out an ongoing, six-year cyclical schedule for the review of all U of S undergraduate and graduate programs.

Colleges and departments under review complete self-study reports on their programs, and teams of internal and external reviewers visit the campus, taking an in-depth look at program offerings and facilities, and interviewing students, professors, deans, department heads, administrators and others involved.

All stages of the SPR process - college and department self studies, site visits and reports by reviewers, responses by the colleges and departments involved, final assessment by the Vice-President Academic, Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, and their committees, and action-plans for the programs - are aimed at improving instructional programs, encouraging program innovation, demonstrating university accountability, and helping the U of S plan program revisions, program deletions and resource allocation.

Recommendations from the reviewers have already begun to be implemented.

Description of Categories

Category A: The program is supported by evidence of academic vitality in teaching and scholarly/artistic work and extension/public service sustained over a significant period of time. It has achieved at least a national reputation, and might be expected to develop as a centre of excellence. Few, if any, fundamental changes are required. There will be a commitment to at least sustain the program at existing levels and provide additional resources where justified.

Category B: The program is supported by evidence of academic vitality in teaching and scholarly/artistic work and extension/public service sustained over a period of time but has some weaknesses. Some fundamental changes should be made. Modifications may include program changes (e.g. curriculum revisions), internal redirection of faculty resources, additional resource allocations, (both faculty and non-faculty), and, measures to improve student satisfaction/quality of experience in the program. There will be a commitment to sustain the program at approximately the current level and to consider additional resource needs in the context of regular university resource allocation processes.

Category C: The program is supported by some evidence of academic vitality in teaching and scholarly/artistic work and extension/public service but has identifiable deficiencies which should be rectified in a given timeframe. It is characterized by sufficient demand, and/or may be essential to the service requirements of other units. Several fundamental changes must be made to achieve adequacy and provide a credible program. Deficiencies may be identified as program (e.g., curricular), faculty/scholarly activity (e.g. quality and quantity of scholarship or breadth of expertise of faculty), and non-faculty resources. There will be a requirement for development of a concrete and realistic action plan by the unit/College to address deficiencies within an identifiable time frame.

Category D: The program, over a period of years, has shown little evidence of academic vitality in teaching or scholarly/artistic work or extension/public service. Such a program may suffer from additional liabilities including low quality to cost ratio, low student demand, and lack of provision of an important service component to other programs. The academic quality of the program area is unlikely to improve without significant additional resources. Many fundamental changes are required. There will be a requirement to consider initiation of approved Council procedures for program termination.