CHAPTER FOUR: 4110
ACADEMIC POLICIES AND REGULATIONS
December 2006
4110
NEW
OR EXPANDED ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
PREAMBLE:
This section outlines the process by which new or expanded academic programs
come to be offered. This section appeared in the 1979
Handbook. It was changed in November, 1991, to reflect the shift of
responsibility for the catalog from the Faculty Secretary’s Office to the
Provost or Registrar's Office. Unless otherwise noted, the text is as of July
1996. For more information, contact the Provost's Office (208-885-6448).
[ed. 7-00]
A.
INTRODUCTION. The regents require the
preparation and submission of a detailed analysis and evaluation of each new or
expanded program that is proposed. A new or expanded program is one that will
result in UI offering a new degree, certificate, major, or field of
specialization within a major. The analysis and evaluation must include
supporting information of many kinds, including but not limited to the
following:
A-1.
The need for the program should be clearly documented by requests, studies,
employment opportunities, and other pertinent data. The national picture
should be correlated with the state and local scenes in stating the need for a
new program.
A-2.
Feasibility studies should be done in most instances where new programs are
requested. Desire and need do not necessarily mean that implementation is
feasible.
A-3.
Cost is a controlling factor in approval of a new program. The availability of
funds for new programs constitutes a constraint in approving or disapproving
program requests.
A-4.
Potential student enrollment must be considered. A forecast of prospective
enrollment is prerequisite to the approval of a new program. It should be
recognized, of course, that the existence of a program tends to attract
students. So, a projection of enrollment cannot be exact but it should be
within reasonable limits.
A-5.
UI’s capabilities should be clearly set out. Supporting programs in courses
that are necessary to the successful operation of a specific program cover a
wide range of prerequisite programs that must be taken into consideration in
locating a program at UI.
A-6.
Preferences for new program development may vary among institutions in the
state system. The specific interests of the faculty, the administration, and
others in establishing priorities for new programs at UI must be supported by
pertinent data.
A-7.
Priorities should be established. At any time, a number of new programs may be
needed and seem feasible. Fiscal constraints and other criteria against which
new program adoption is measured mandate, therefore, an indication of the
priority for the development of the proposed program.
A-8.
Based on established programs, the designation of certain institutions for
development of programs in specified disciplines must be considered.
Geographical location, community factors, and existing related programs will
have an important effect upon program development.
A-9.
The capability of UI in the various areas of new program development must also
be considered. Established capability probably weighs more heavily than
potential for developing future capabilities. Moreover, the capability of UI
is clearly conditioned by the historical development of programs that have
been authorized in the past.
A-10.
Unnecessary duplication should be avoided. In some instances, similar programs
may be needed in the various areas of the state. In other instances, one
well-developed program will not only suffice, but will be the only program
that can meet the criteria referred to above.
A-11.
The interrelationships of programs are important. The ladder and lattice
concepts must be developed wherever possible. Two-year programs in one
institution should be so structured that they are interchangeable parts of
four-year programs at other institutions.
A-12. The curricula should be developed so
that they fit certification and licensure requirements. They should also be
eligible for approval by national accrediting agencies.
A-13.
Criteria for determining the feasibility of new or expanded programs include:
(1) demonstrated need based on documented requests, organized studies,
enrollment predictions, personnel requirements, and/or accreditation
standards; (2) relationships of new or expanded programs to the overall and
specific educational programs of UI and the state system of higher education
as approved by the regents; (3) current and future capabilities of UI to make
available facilities, equipment, and personnel adequate to ensure a high
quality program; and (4) estimates of income and expenditures, both direct and
indirect, for the program for a minimum of three years.
B.
FORMAT AND PROCEDURES. The Office of the
State Board of Education has devised a set of forms (available from the Provost’s
Office) for use in the presentation of the supporting information called for
above. Concurrently with the submission of these forms, text for catalog entries
pertaining to the new or expanded program should be submitted to the faculty
secretary for editing and routing. Proposed certificate programs and proposed undergraduate programs are sent to
the University Curriculum Committee; graduate programs are sent to the Graduate
Council and then to the University Curriculum Committee. If recommended by the
University Curriculum Committee, they are presented to the Faculty Council and,
if approved, to the university faculty for action. [See also
1540
C.] [ed. 7-01, rev. 12-06]
C.
TIME TABLE FOR APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION.
Customarily the president presents proposals for new or expanded programs to the
regents at their June meeting. For the regents to act at that time, the proposal
must be presented at the April meeting (the agenda is prepared early in March).
To be included on the April agenda, final action by the university faculty must
be completed in February. Thus, to provide time for consideration by the
University Curriculum Committee (and the Graduate Council in the case of
graduate programs) and by the Faculty Council, proposals for new or expanded
programs must be in the Office of the Faculty Secretary no later than October.
Experience has shown that proposals reported out of the colleges after October
have had to wait about two years for implementation.
Back to Table of Contents
Forward to 4120
