The Program Review Sub-Committee of the Senate Academic Planning Committee (SAPC) was established in November 2011 as part of Laurier's new Institutional Quality Assurance Procedures.

Program Review Sub-Committee Terms of Reference

1. Membership and Quorum

The Program Review Sub-Committee consists of five members and an alternate:
• Associate Vice-President: Teaching and Learning (chair)
• 1 dean
• 3 regular faculty members
• 1 regular faculty member (alternate)

The members are appointed by the Senate Academic Planning Committee (SAPC), on the recommendation of the Associate Vice-President: Teaching and Learning for a 3 year term.  Quorum for the sub-committee is three members.  Administrative support is provided by the Quality Assurance Office. 


2. Responsibilities of the Sub-Committee

The Program Review Sub-Committee is responsible for managing the program review process and for making recommendations to SAPC on a number of matters relating to new program development and cyclical review of existing programs.

Cyclical Review
• The Sub-Committee will select a review committee from the nominees recommended by the program. If the Sub-Committee is not satisfied with the appropriateness of the nominees they will request additional names from the academic unit. Recommendations will be presented to Senate Academic Planning for information.
• The Sub-Committee will review the Final Assessment Report and the associated Implementation Plan written by the Dean, Associate Vice-President: Teaching & Learning, and Vice-President: Academic and submit it to the Senate Academic Planning Committee for further review and final approval.
• The Sub-Committee will annually review the progress of the Implementation Plan and the Monitoring Reports prepared by the program and submitted annually in the years between review cycles.
• The Sub-Committee will approve and annually review the scheduling of cyclical reviews.

Development of New Programs
• The Program Review Sub-Committee will review all new program proposals in order to assess their completeness and appropriateness. Following such review, the Sub-Committee will bring a recommendation to Senate Academic Planning that the proposal either proceed to external review or be returned to the unit for revision.
• The Sub-Committee will select a review committee from the nominees recommended by the program. If the Sub-Committee is not satisfied with the appropriateness of the nominees they will request additional names from the academic unit. Recommendations will be presented to Senate Academic Planning for information.
• Once the external reviewer’s visit has occurred, the Sub-Committee will review the proposal in conjunction with the reviewers’ report and the unit’s response and make a recommendation to Senate Academic Planning to a) approve the proposal; b) return the proposal to the unit for further revisions; or c) not approve the proposal.
• The Sub-Committee will review the annual report submitted by the chair or coordinator of the new program.

3. In Camera Sessions

The following documents related to cyclical review and new program development are considered to be confidential:
• All volumes of cyclical review self-studies
• Reviewer’s reports for both cyclical review and new program proposals
• Program responses for both cyclical review and new program proposals

Any time that the sub-committee is discussing confidential documents, the meetings will move to an in camera session.

Members of the sub-committee shall not disclose or discuss confidential information from in camera sessions. Minutes of the in camera sessions of the sub-committee shall be recorded by the administrative support and retained in a secure location.