There is no set format for the self-study report. The following outline is indicative of the type of content that is viewed to be essential to any such study. Additional information is invited if it will enhance the effectiveness of the presentation. Materials that do not relate to the objectives of the program review process should not be included.

Attention should be given to the process of the self-study, not simply the content of the final report. Departments are strongly encouraged to use the period of self-study as an opportunity to achieve a particular departmental purpose; for example, to revise curricula, to formulate methods of assessing "end of program" outcomes, to more fully involve "stakeholders" in program evaluation and design. Self-studies conducted to achieve internal purposes will be much more productive than those undertaken to meet some external requirement.

Thought should be given to the process of self-study: e.g., the ways in which various groups--including departmental faculty and committees, undergraduate majors, and, possibly, prospective employers--will be involved in the self-study process and the steps that will comprise that process. The particular subjects emphasized in the self-study report will depend upon the purposes set by the department for its period of self-study as well as the features of the particular undergraduate programs offered by the department. The following outline suggests the contents that should be considered for inclusion in the self-study report.

• I. Mission
  • · The mission of the program in relation to the GPC mission and the University of Georgia mission.
• II. Background and Statement of Goals
  • · This should include a brief history of the program, including recent changes, and any recent or impending accomplishments or problems. There should be a clear statement of how the department and programs relate to the mission of the University. Specific goals, directions, and objectives for the future should be identified, along with a discussion of specific obstacles, needs, or opportunities. Has the department re-defined the learning objectives of its degree programs in recent years? How do the goals and objectives for the individual degree programs relate to the overall goals and objectives of the department, and college? This section should provide a context for the rest of the self-study.
• III. Description of the Review Process including Committee Members
• IV. Findings in Terms of Each of the Following:
  1. VIABILITY
     1. Introduction
     2. Explanation of Data
        • Students
          • Percent and number of majors
          • Percent and number of graduates/transferees
          • Diversity: Sex and racial composition
        • Faculty
          • Numbers of part-time and full-time faculty
          • Proportion of class sections taught by part-time faculty
          • Diversity: Sex and racial composition of f-t faculty
          • Credentials: Faculty Roster by term and number and proportion of faculty by highest degree
          • Professional development
          • Faculty productivity
        • Costs
          • Full-time faculty salaries as proportion of total institutional full-time faculty salaries
          • Average full-time faculty salary
          • Expenditures (f-t and p-t faculty salaries, overload, joint enrollment, and compensation, etc.) per FTE student
        • Facilities
          • Space: Adequacy and condition
          • Technology
          • Labs
          • Equipment
        • Curriculum
          • Currency: Marketability, demand, relevance to community
          • Course sequencing and frequency of course offerings: evaluation of best order to facilitate learning, offered often enough
        • Library
          • Adequacy for student needs
          • Adequacy for faculty needs
        • Other Learning and Service Areas
          • Advising: Number of advisees by major, satisfaction with advisement
          • Tutoring: Number of tutees by major and subject, satisfaction with tutoring
     3. Summary of Data related to Viability of Program
  2. PRODUCTIVITY
     1. Introduction
     2. Explanation of Data
        • Credit-hour generation: Number and proportion of GPC total
        • Student-faculty ration
        • Average class size
        • Number of graduates-full-time faculty ratio
        • Average full-time faculty workload (number of classes)
        • Range and average credit hour production per f-t faculty member
        • Relevance to student needs: ACT
        • Enrollment Patterns by course
        • Other Learning and Service Areas
          • Internships
          • Service learning
          • Practica
          • Career planning and placement
     3. Summary of data related to Productivity of Program
  3. QUALITY
     1. Introduction
     2. Explanation of Data
        • Skills at entry: SAT Scores, CPE Scores, HS GPA
        • Percent and number of graduates passing professional exam
        • Achievement of student learning outcomes
        • Evidence of success in meeting student needs & learning outcomes
          • Graduate Exit Survey'
          • Employer Survey
          • Alumni Survey
        • Evidence of success in meeting learning outcomes
          • GPC transfers' GPA at receiving institution in major
          • Student progress
        • Curriculum
          • Relevance to alumni employers' needs: Employer Survey
          • Coherence: Relevance and effectiveness in relation to learning outcomes
        • Student satisfaction with program
          • Graduate Exit Survey
          • ACT Student Opinion survey
        • Retention Rates
     3. Summary of Data related to Quality of Program
• V. RECOMMENDATIONS
• VI. PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE PROGRAM
• VII. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSED PLAN
• VIII. DATE OF NEXT SCHEDULED REVIEW