AICUP Position Paper

Uniformity of the Program Review Process

September 14, 2011

 

Pennsylvania currently has an inequitable system of program review for new programs offered by institutions of higher education.  Public universities are allowed to develop new programs without state input as long as these new programs are approved by their Board of Trustees and, in the case of State System universities, except for certain areas like law or medicine and doctoral programs. (The one exception to the State System limitation is Indiana University of Pennsylvania, which is given doctoral-granting authority by statute.) 

 

Many private universities were founded at a time when the Commonwealth awarded them “universal charters” granting them the authority to develop new programs without state oversight as long as the institution did not initiate new degrees. A small subset of private institutions were granted “universal restricted charters,” similar to the “universal charter” with some exclusions for professional degrees in law, medicine or theology. Early in the 20^th century, however, the state began to seek greater oversight of its colleges and universities, so many private institutions with later founding dates were given “restricted charters.” These institutions must seek approval from the Secretary of Education for every new program. Furthermore, the Commonwealth began restricting the charters of some institutions with previously unrestricted charters when they came back to the state to change its degree levels (for instance, moving from a two-year to four-year degree institution). (See attached list of private institutions with “Universal Charters,” “Universal Restricted Charters,” and “Restricted Charters.”)

 

 

While a case can be made for the value of undergoing a state review of new program offerings, the uneven playing field in Pennsylvania creates problems for those institutions with restricted charters. Preparing for a state review can be time-consuming and expensive and frequently the state review can be duplicative of other accreditation reviews. Having to announce publicly plans for the program and then wait months for the PDE review also gives competitors with universal charters the ability to undercut the institution obliged to wait for the program review. Finally, due to budget cuts over the last decade, PDE has fewer staff reviewers and therefore is continuously behind in the review process. This creates start-up delays for many university and college programs. This sluggish review creates an unfair advantage for public institutions and “universal charter” institutions not required to undergo the review process. The Department has also restricted the number of new programs it will review each year due to the unavailability of resources.

While it makes sense for the Department to review the capacity of institutions to offer new degrees, the approval of individual majors and programs should be left up to the institution and its administrators and faculty. At the encouragement of the AICUP Board at our April 2011 meeting, AICUP staff has prepared statutory language to eliminate the requirement for PDE program approval and replace it with requirements that the institution receives Middle States accreditation and has been in operation for at least 10 years. 

 

AICUP Position Paper

Uniformity of the Program Review Process

September 14, 2011

 

Pennsylvania currently has an inequitable system of program review for new programs offered by institutions of higher education.  Public universities are allowed to develop new programs without state input as long as these new programs are approved by their Board of Trustees and, in the case of State System universities, except for certain areas like law or medicine and doctoral programs. (The one exception to the State System limitation is Indiana University of Pennsylvania, which is given doctoral-granting authority by statute.) 

 

Many private universities were founded at a time when the Commonwealth awarded them “universal charters” granting them the authority to develop new programs without state oversight as long as the institution did not initiate new degrees. A small subset of private institutions were granted “universal restricted charters,” similar to the “universal charter” with some exclusions for professional degrees in law, medicine or theology. Early in the 20^th century, however, the state began to seek greater oversight of its colleges and universities, so many private institutions with later founding dates were given “restricted charters.” These institutions must seek approval from the Secretary of Education for every new program. Furthermore, the Commonwealth began restricting the charters of some institutions with previously unrestricted charters when they came back to the state to change its degree levels (for instance, moving from a two-year to four-year degree institution). (See attached list of private institutions with “Universal Charters,” “Universal Restricted Charters,” and “Restricted Charters.”)

 

 

While a case can be made for the value of undergoing a state review of new program offerings, the uneven playing field in Pennsylvania creates problems for those institutions with restricted charters. Preparing for a state review can be time-consuming and expensive and frequently the state review can be duplicative of other accreditation reviews. Having to announce publicly plans for the program and then wait months for the PDE review also gives competitors with universal charters the ability to undercut the institution obliged to wait for the program review. Finally, due to budget cuts over the last decade, PDE has fewer staff reviewers and therefore is continuously behind in the review process. This creates start-up delays for many university and college programs. This sluggish review creates an unfair advantage for public institutions and “universal charter” institutions not required to undergo the review process. The Department has also restricted the number of new programs it will review each year due to the unavailability of resources.

While it makes sense for the Department to review the capacity of institutions to offer new degrees, the approval of individual majors and programs should be left up to the institution and its administrators and faculty. At the encouragement of the AICUP Board at our April 2011 meeting, AICUP staff has prepared statutory language to eliminate the requirement for PDE program approval and replace it with requirements that the institution receives Middle States accreditation and has been in operation for at least 10 years.