Alabama Administrative Code
Title 300 - ALABAMA COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Chapter 300-2-1 - PROGRAM REVIEW
Section 300-2-1-.03 - Evaluation And Review Of New Instructional Program Proposals Of Public Postsecondary Institutions

Universal Citation: AL Admin Code R 300-2-1-.03

Current through Register Vol. 42, No. 11, August 30, 2024

(1) Purpose: The purpose of reviewing new program proposals of public postsecondary institutions is to insure that such proposals meet the criteria established by the Alabama Commission on Higher Education.

(2) Commission Responsibility: It is the responsibility of the Alabama Commission on Higher Education to establish policies and procedures for reviewing and taking action on all new instructional program proposals for Alabama's public postsecondary institutions.

(3) Scope and Definitions. This section shall apply to academic programs leading toward one of the following degree designations as defined within the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS):

(a) Level 2, Long certificate (CER): an award granted on completion of ta program consisting of at least 30 but no more than 59 semester hours of undergraduate coursework. Typically, CERs consist of technical coursework and are offered by community and technical colleges.

(b) Level 3, Associate degree: an award granted on completion of an educational program that requires at least 60 semester hours of undergraduate coursework or the equivalent, with a general education component consisting of at least 15 semester hours or the equivalent.

(c) Level 5, Baccalaureate degree: an undergraduate award granted on completion of an educational program that requires at least 120 semester hours of undergraduate coursework or the equivalent, with a general education component consisting of at least 30 semester hours or the equivalent.

(d) Level 7, Master' degree: a graduate award granted on completion of an educational program that requires at least 30 semester hours of post-baccalaureate, graduate, or professional coursework.

(e) Level 8, Education Specialist (EdS): Within the field of education, a degree that requires completion of an organized program beyond the master's degree but does not meet the requirements of an academic degree at the doctorate level.

(f) Level 17, Research Doctorate: A Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or other doctor's degree that requires advanced work beyond the master's level, including the preparation and defense of a dissertation based on original research, or the planning and execution of an original project demonstrating substantial artistic or scholarly achievement. ACHE includes Doctor of Education (EdD) in this level.

(g) Level 18, Professional Doctorate: A doctor's degree that is conferred upon completion of a program providing the knowledge and skills for the recognition, credential, or license required for professional practice.

(h) Level 19, Doctorate Other: A doctor's degree that does not meet the definition of a doctor's degree - research/ scholarship or a doctor's degree - professional practice.

(4) Preparation and Submission of Proposals: Program proposals will be prepared by the institutions in keeping with procedures set forth below and with guidelines published by Commission staff. Program proposals may be submitted electronically to the Commission at any time. Receipt of a proposal for review by the Commission does not imply approval of the program.

(5) Procedures for the Evaluation and Review of New Two-Year College Programs of Instruction: In the case of proposals from community, junior, and technical colleges, evaluation and review of new program proposals will occur in conjunction with the Alabama Community College System (ACCS).

(a) Review of Program Applications: ACCS will conduct a review of the program application. This review will determine whether the program is denied, whether additional information is required, or whether the program is eligible for further consideration. If approved, ACCS will send the program application to the Commission staff for review, which shall include consideration of program design, state and regional needs, and stewardship of resources. Should additional information or program modifications be deemed necessary, ACCS will provide such for consideration.

(b) Completion of Staff Recommendation and Commission Action on the Program: Completion of the Commission staff recommendation and Commission action on the program will occur within ninety days after receipt of the formal request, unless a longer time frame is recommended for the institution to address deficiencies within the proposal. Commission staff recommendations will encompass expected program outcomes that will be monitored over the post-implementation period, as described below in § 300-2-1-.04. Commission approval of a program is based upon agreement of ACCS to discontinue the program if the expected outcomes are not reached within the established time frame.

(c) Review of Programs Designed to Meet the Needs of Business and Industry: The purpose of these procedures is to expedite the review of new programs designed to meet the immediate needs of business and industry.
1. For such programs, the proposing college will submit a program application to ACCS, providing evidence of the immediate need of a specific business or industry which can be met only through the development and implementation of the proposed instructional program.

2. Completion of the Commission staff recommendation and Commission action on the program will occur within sixty days after receipt of the program proposal, unless another time frame is agreed upon. Commission staff recommendations will encompass expected program outcomes that will be monitored over the post-implementation period, as described below in § 300-2-1-.04. Commission approval of a program is based upon agreement of ACCS to discontinue the program if the expected outcomes are not reached within the established time frame.

(d) Provision for Reconsideration of Programs Disapproved by the Commission: Upon the request of the institution, ACCS may request a second review of the program six months after the program has been disapproved by the Commission on the basis of substantial additional information bearing on previous concerns and issues.

(6) Procedures for the Evaluation and Review of New Baccalaureate Programs of Instruction: The evaluation and review of new baccalaureate programs shall be conducted with the participation of the University Chief Academic Officers.

(a) Submission and Peer Review of the Program Proposal: The program proposal may be submitted electronically to the Commission at any time. In preparation for each Commission meeting, Commission staff will contact the chair of the University Chief Academic Officers to request feedback on baccalaureate proposals from institutional representatives. As appropriate, Commission staff may request responses from the proposing institution to issues raised in the peer review and may recommend changes to improve the program proposals.

(b) Review of the Program by Commission Staff: Commission staff will consider the following factors in its review, along with other factors as appropriate:
1. The objectives of the proposed program in relation to student demand and the workforce needs of the state;

2. The fit of the program within the institution's mission and role;

3. Resources required and the capacity of the institution to deliver the program as proposed;

4. Potential for unnecessary duplication of offerings beyond core academic programs; and

5. Opportunities for collaboration with other institutions that offer similar or related programs.

(c) Staff recommendation and Commission Action on the Proposed Program: Completion of the staff recommendation and action by the Commission will occur within ninety days after receipt of the program proposal, unless a longer time frame is recommended for the institution to address deficiencies within the proposal. The staff recommendation will encompass expected program outcomes that will be monitored over the post-implementation period, as described below in § 300-2-1-.04. Commission approval of a program requires agreement by the institution to discontinue the program if expected outcomes are not reached within the established time frame.

(7) Procedures for the Evaluation and Review of New Graduate Programs of Instruction: The evaluation and review of new master's, education specialist, and doctorate programs shall be conducted with the participation of the Alabama Council of Graduate Deans (ACGD).

(a) Submission and Peer Review of the Program Proposal: The program proposal may be submitted electronically to the Commission at any time. In preparation for each Commission meeting, Commission staff will contact the ACGD chair to request members' feedback on graduate proposals, especially around academic quality of the proposed program, potential student demand for the proposed program, and additional capacity within similar programs offered by the responding institution. ACGD shall establish the format and procedures for peer review. As appropriate, Commission staff may request responses from the proposing institution to issues raised in the peer review and may recommend changes to improve the proposal.

(b) Review of the Program by Commission Staff: A higher level of scrutiny shall be given to graduate program proposals due to increased resources and capacity that such programs require. Commission staff shall consider the following factors in its review, along with other factors as appropriate:
1. The objectives of the proposed program in relation to student demand and the workforce needs of the state;

2. The fit of the program within the institution's mission and role;

3. Resources required and the capacity of the institution to deliver the program as proposed;

4. Potential for unnecessary duplication of offerings; and

5. Opportunities for collaboration with other institutions that offer similar or related programs.

(c) Staff Recommendation and Commission Action on the Proposed Program: Completion of the staff recommendation and action by the Commission will occur within ninety days after receipt of the program proposal, unless a longer time frame is recommended for the institution to address deficiencies within the proposal. The staff recommendation will encompass expected program outcomes that will be monitored over the post-implementation period, as described below in § 300-2-1-.04. Commission approval of a program requires agreement by the institution to discontinue the program if expected outcomes are not reached within the established time frame.

(8) Consideration of Program Proposals above the Instructional Role Level Recognized by the Commission.

(a) Statutory Description: The Commission may review program proposals in a single discipline at a level higher than an institution's Commission-recognized instructional degree level, so long as the proposed program accords with the institution's description in state statute. Proposals for programs that are outside the statutory description of the institution will be considered incomplete and returned to the proposing institution.

(b) Provisions for Proposing a Program above Instructional Role: An institution may seek approval for a new degree program above its recognized instructional role under one of the following provisions:
1. Strategic Benefit: Beyond standard criteria for program review stated above, the proposed program must demonstrate that it contributes a "strategic benefit" to the configuration of current public institution offerings in the State of Alabama. "Strategic benefit" is defined as significant and meaningful overall benefit for the state of Alabama, and includes:
(i) Alabama's need for graduates in the field;

(ii) The program's academic quality and articulation with the institution's academic mission;

(iii) Demonstration that the proposed program will not result in unnecessary duplication of offerings (Code of Ala. 1975 § 16-5-8 [4][b]) with other Alabama public universities;

(iv) Justification of having no anticipated or projected adverse influence on enrollments at public institution(s) already having that program, particularly those within 50 miles of the proposing institution or within that service area;

(v) Priority consideration being accorded to institution(s) with seniority in that service area (Code of Ala. 1975, § 16-5-10);

(vi) Demonstration that the proposed program will serve a strong distinct, and well-documented societal, educational, and economic need for Alabama.

2. Specialized Accreditation Requirement: The Commission will review program proposals in a single discipline at a level higher than an institution's Commission-recognized instructional degree level if an elevation in degree level for an existing program is required by the recognized accrediting agency for that single discipline program and must be attained to continue the program's accreditation.

(c) Staff Recommendation: During the review process, if staff determines that higher degree-level program proposal does not meet one of the provisions above (strategic benefit or specialized accreditation), the staff recommendation will be to "not approve" the proposal.

(d) Peer Review: An institution submitting a higher degree level program in a single discipline will be evaluated and voted upon by the Alabama Council of Graduate Deans or College and University Chief Academic Officers, as appropriate.

(e) Resubmission of Disapproved Programs: If a single discipline elevation does not receive an approve vote, the institution may not resubmit that program's revised single discipline proposal until at least one year has elapsed from date of refusal.

(f) Commission Approval: Receipt of a higher degree-level proposal for review by the Commission does not imply approval of the program. The proposal will still be subject to the academic program review process, vote by the Commission, and post-implementation procedures and conditions.

(g) Successive Proposals for Higher Degree-Level Programs: An institution may be approved for up to three higher degree level programs before seeking an expansion of instructional role. Successive single discipline program implementation requests shall be evaluated sequentially in that demonstration of prior success is a substantive factor in subsequent review process(es). An institution is not "automatically" granted three single discipline program request opportunities.

(9) Possible Commission Actions on New Program Proposals: The Commission may take one of three actions on proposed programs: disapproval, approval, or deferral.

(10) Program Implementation: Once program approval is given by the Commission, the institution must implement the program within two years of the proposed implementation date, unless another implementation time frame is granted.

Author: William O. Blow; Robin E. McGill

Statutory Authority: Code of Ala. 1975, §§ 16-5-1, et seq.

Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. Alabama may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.