AP 303-35: Program and Course Management

PDF Version  Academics & Research – Academics & Instruction

Academic Policy 303-35	Authority: University President
Effective: September 1, 2023	Proponent: Academic Senate

Summary: This policy describes standards for developing and maintaining undergraduate and graduate programs and courses at Eastern Washington University.

History: This policy was amended and approved by the Academic Senate on October 24, 2022,and May 1, 2023, and approved by the University President on June 30, 2023.  Additional changes were approved by the Academic Senate on May 22, 2023, and approved by the University President on September 1, 2023.

Chapter 1 – General Provisions

1-1. Administration

Academic programs and courses are developed and managed through the joint efforts of academic departments, colleges, and the councils and committees of the academic senate.

1-2. Responsibilities

1. Academic departments have overall responsibility for developing, managing, and maintaining quality academic programs and courses under their authority.
2. The Undergraduate Affairs Council (UAC) and Graduate Affairs Council (GAC) develop policy recommendations relative to academic program and course management. The councils furnish information and advice to divisions and departments as new programs or courses are proposed.
3. The Course and Program Approval Committees (CPAC) review and make recommendations to the UAC/GAC relative to course and program proposals. The UAC/GAC review and approve course proposals for submission to the Provost. The UAC/GAC review and approve program proposals for submission to the Academic Senate, who forwards them for further action to the Provost.
4. Vice provosts will provide administrative support and assistance as described herein. Throughout this policy, the term ‘vice-provost’ refers to the vice provost, or designee, responsible for course and program management relative to the academic level of the proposal (i.e. undergraduate or graduate).

Chapter 2 – Program Management

2-1. Program Establishment and Revision

Procedures for the establishment of degree programs at Eastern have been developed in cooperation with the other state institutions of higher learning. Specific procedures for establishing/revising degree programs are found in chapter 5 and appendix A.

2-2. Reappraisal

All new degree programs must be reappraised within five years of original approval.

2-3. Advertising of New/Revised Programs

Advertising related to any new or a substantively revised academic program requires the prior review and approval of the appropriate vice provost before publication. The vice provost must approve any advertising that is anticipated to precede UAC/GAC consideration or approval of new or substantively revised degree programs. Substantive here means a change in any core requirements, changes affecting an entire cohort or group of students, changes to more than 20% of the minimum credits for the degree program, or change in delivery mode to on-line.

Chapter 3 – Course Management

3-1. Standard Courses

A standard course is one with defined subject matter content rather than one in which the student may be investigating a problem, performing an internship, or in which the topics vary from one offering to another as in a “current topics” course. Standard courses are approved through the course approval process as outlined in chapter 5.

Procedures for establishing and revising courses are included in chapter 5.

3-2. Non-Standard Courses

Non-standard courses have varying content/topics and student learning outcomes from one quarter to the next and may not be offered consistently. Communication between the department, faculty and student is required for enrollment.

1. Non-standard courses have course numbers ending in 39, 95, 96, 97, 98, and 99, and must adhere to established standards for approval. These end numbers are not to be used for standard courses.
2. The following numbers are assigned to specific non-standard courses:
   • Courses with numbers ending in 39 are used for special, selected or current topics. These courses may be repeated for credit under a different title/topic.
   • Course numbers ending in 95 are used for internships and practica.
   • Course numbers ending in 96 are used for experimental courses. These are courses being evaluated for potential implementation as standard courses. The course may not be offered more than twice in a five year period before being reviewed by the UAC/GAC for consideration as a standard course through the course approval process outlined in chapter 5.
   • Course numbers ending in 97 are used for workshops. These are courses concerned with a single narrow subject and may be offered in a concentrated time frame.
   • Course numbers ending in 98 are used for seminar courses. A seminar is a small class of students engaged in advanced study and original research. Seminars are a full term in length and have regularly scheduled class meetings
   • Independent and directed study courses are numbered ending in 99.
3. Only departments offering approved graduate degree programs may use the graduate-level non-standard numbers without prior approval. Other departments require approval from the GAC to offer non-standard graduate courses on either a blanket basis or by approval of individual situations. The council will expect such departments to document their qualifications for offering graduate-level courses.

3-3. Stacked Courses

Stacked courses are taught at multiple levels (100, 200, 300, 400, 500) in the same discipline, program, or subject area, at the same time, location, and by the same instructor. These courses must be approved as stacked courses by the Dean and UAC or GAC respectively. In the case of stacked courses that involve both undergraduate and graduate courses, these proposals must be approved by the Dean and both UAC and GAC. In addition, there must be stated student learning outcomes and differential performance measurements in undergraduate/graduate stacked courses clearly stated in the course syllabus and reflect the level of rigor expected for the course.

3-4. Cross-Listed Courses

Cross-listed courses are taught across two or more disciplines, programs, or subject areas, at the same time, location, and by the same instructor.

Cross-listed courses must be proposed to and approved by the appropriate UAC/GAC CPAC. New, experimental non-standard courses may be cross-listed twice within a five-year period before they must be submitted to the appropriate CPAC.

The attributes of a cross-listed course in one discipline, program or subject must apply to the same course in all other disciplines, programs or subject areas, including prerequisites, applicability as prerequisites, applicability towards degree/program requirements, GECR status and course fees.

The proposing departments must demonstrate how students and the university are benefited by the cross-listing.

For internal reporting, full-time equivalent students (FTESs) and full-time equivalent faculty (FTEF) associated with all cross-listed courses will be allocated to the department that “funds” the course, (i.e., the department which pays the salaries and benefits of the instructor teaching the course).  The Higher Education Enrollment Reports submitted to the office of financial management (OFM) will count FTESs towards the CIP discipline in which the student registers.   Cross-listed course requests will clearly identify which department is funding the course.

Chapter 4 – Credit Hour Assignment

4-1. General

This chapter establishes university standards with regard to the definition of “credit hour” and the assignment of credit hours to courses and other types of academic work.  The Office of the Provost and Vice president for Academic Affairs shall have primary responsibility for publication, dissemination and implementation of these provisions.

Regulations of the U.S. Department of Education require institutions of higher education to define “credit hour” and to develop policies and procedures for assignment of credit hours to courses and other types of academic work consistent with the institution’s definition.

4-2. Policy

A “credit hour” is a measure of graduate or undergraduate academic work represented in intended student learning outcomes and verified by evidence of student achievement that reasonably approximates not less than one hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction[1]  and an average of approximately, but not less than, two-hours per week of student work outside of class per credit for an on campus course. For compressed courses, the expected weekly student effort scales with the compression factor.

For purposes of laboratory work, individual study, field application, internships, practica, ensemble, studio work, distance learning, hybrid courses, and other academic work leading to the award of credit hours, each credit hour should reasonably approximate an equivalent amount of work as described in Paragraph 1 above. The following definitions are provided as general guidance for approximating a minimum amount of student work in the learning formats described below:

1. Face-to-face traditional: One (1) credit hour for face-to-face traditional credit is defined as one (1) hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two hours of out-of-class student work for each week of instructional time.
2. Distance and Online learning: One (1) credit hour for distance or online learning is defined as three (3) hours of instruction and/or student work per week that leads to equivalent learning outcomes required for an on-campus course.
3. Field application, internship, practicum, or clinical rotation: One (1) credit hour for field placement, internship, practicum, or clinical rotation is defined as at least thirty (30) hours of supervised work each quarter.
4. Laboratory: One (1) credit hour for laboratory credit is defined as a minimum of two (2) class hours of work each week in a laboratory under the supervision of a lab supervisor/instructor and an expectation of one (1) class hour of additional out-of-class student work each week.
5. Individual study: One (1) credit hour for individualized study (e.g. thesis, research report, and independent study) is defined as a minimum of three (3) class hours of direct instruction and/or individual work each week.
6. Studio: One (1) credit hour for studio credit is defined as a minimum of two (2) class hours of instruction per week for each credit hour and an expectation of one (1) class hour of additional out-of-class student work each week.
7. Ensemble (music classes): One (1) credit hour for studio credit is defined as a minimum of two (2) class hours of instruction per week for each credit hour and an expectation of one (1) class hour of additional out-of-class student work each week.
8. Hybrid: This mode of instruction is a combination of face-to-face traditional and distance learning. For a hybrid course, one (1) credit hour should reasonably approximate the combination of face-to-face traditional credit and distance learning credit that is proportional to the percentage of the instructional time for each of the two modes.

4-3. Procedures

The following procedures describe the university’s process for determining the assignment of credit hours to courses:

1. In the process of developing a new course, faculty will propose the appropriate assignment of credit hours to a course on the Course and Program Approval Committee (CPAC) Course Form.
2. Faculty must provide sufficient information and detail in syllabi to establish that the minimum amount of work expected of students is consistent with the assignment of credit hours to the course.
3. The proposed assignment of credit hours must be submitted to the following administrators and committees for review and approval:

• Department Chair
• Dean of the College
• Vice Provost
• Course and Program Approval Committee
• Undergraduate Affairs Council(for undergraduate courses) or Graduate Affairs Council (for graduate courses)

1. The Provost or the Provost’s designee will provide final verification of the assignment of credit hours, and will be responsible for the interpretation of policies and procedures pertaining to the assignment of credit hours to a course or other types of academic work.
2. The Provost or Provost’s designee will consult with departmental faculty to make changes when the assignment of credit is inconsistent with this policy.

Courses and/or academic work must be scheduled in a way that conforms to the above definition of credit hour.

Chapter 5 – Program & Course Development

New courses or changes to existing courses, and proposals for new programs or substantive revisions to existing programs are submitted to CPAC for review and approval. Course proposals approved by the CPAC are forwarded to UAC/GAC and the Provost for approval. Program proposals approved by the CPAC are forwarded to UAC/GAC, Senate, the Provost and University President for approval. Approved proposals are implemented in the following academic year.

5-1. Definitions

1. Substantive revision of existing programs includes the addition of new courses, changes in course content and credit value, changes in total program credits, and change in delivery mode to on-line.
2. Minor revisions in existing programs include changes in delivery mode (except for a change to on-line delivery), and pre-requisite or course title changes.
3. New program proposals will only be considered if they are included on the current university biennial program plan, or if the appropriate vice provost approves them for submission.

5-2. Proposal Procedures

1. Preparation: Initiating faculty member(s) completes appropriate forms.  Proposal forms and detailed instructions are available on the web pages of the Office of Academic Planning.
2. Coordination: Initiating faculty member(s) coordinates proposal with other offices as needed.
   • Inter-Department Coordination: Any department that may be affected by a new/revised program or course proposal must be contacted regarding the proposal. Affected here means duplication of an existing course without significant methodological, theoretical and/or practical difference in content or incorporation of existing courses into degree or certificate programs. The chair of each affected department will review and approve the proposal, indicating their concurrence or non-concurrence. If there is no comment by the department(s) affected, the proposal will go forward with a notation that the request for reply failed. As part of its review, CPAC will request comment from the affected department(s). If the department(s) does not respond within two weeks (during the academic year), lack of reply will be considered consent, and the review will proceed in due course. CPAC serves as the arbiter of non-concurrence objections and may forward their recommendation to UAC/GAC without securing the concurrence of affected departments.
   • If needed, a CPAC Library Support for Proposed Curricula form will be completed through the collaborative efforts of the department and the library. The Department Chair and the Director of the School of Libraries shall approve the completed form.
   • Department Chair: The Department Chair reviews and approves or disapproves each proposal. Approvals indicate support and resources are available for the proposed changes.
   • Academic Dean: The academic dean makes the final review before submitting the proposal. Approvals indicate support and resources are available for the proposed changes.
   • For graduate programs that include undergraduate courses, the appropriate vice provost may seek the advice and counsel of the UAC.
3. Submission of Course Proposals: The academic dean forwards the proposal to the vice provost. Proposals must be submitted by the submission deadline as published in the Calendar of Deadlines.
   • Administrative Review
     • The vice provost reviews the proposal for meeting institutional needs, protocol and policy adherence, and completeness and then prepares a review summary.
     • Results of the administrative review will be provided to the faculty contact listed on the proposal. The results may require corrections and/or additional information or documentation.
     • The vice provost will not forward any new or revised program proposals without appropriate approval.
     • Once administrative review requirements are satisfied, the vice provost will forward the proposal to the appropriate CPAC.
4. CPAC Review
   • The CPAC reviews the proposal and recommends approval or revision.
   • If the CPAC recommends approval, it will forward the proposal to the UAC/GAC for consideration and voting.
   • If the CPAC does not recommend approval, it will return the proposal to the submitting department for revision/resubmission via the vice provost.  Department Response; the submitting department may:
     1. revise and resubmit the proposal based on CPAC recommendations;
     2. resubmit the proposal, with a written explanation, directly to the UAC/GAC without adjustment for a vote; or,
     3. withdraw the proposal.
5. UAC/GAC Action
   • The UAC/GAC reviews and votes on the proposal. UAC/GAC’s recommendation will be presented to the vice provost for recordation.
6. Vice Provost Action
   • The vice provost will document the UAC/GAC decisions.
   • Approved course proposals will be implemented and listed in university catalog of the following academic year.

5-3. Submission of Program Proposals

For submission of Program Proposals, the procedures described in 5-2(a-b) are completed prior to the following:

1. Administrative Review

The vice provost reviews the proposal for meeting institutional needs, protocol and policy adherence, and completeness and then prepares a review summary.

Results of the administrative review will be provided to the faculty contact listed on the proposal. The results may require corrections and/or additional information or documentation.

The vice provost will not forward any new or revised program proposals without appropriate approval.

Once administrative review requirements are satisfied, the vice provost will forward the proposal to the appropriate CPAC and notify the Academic Senate of proposals involving new programs and substantive changes to programs as an informational item.

2. CPAC Review

The CPAC reviews the proposal and recommends approval or revision.

If the CPAC recommends approval, it will forward the proposal to the UAC/GAC for consideration and voting.

If the CPAC does not recommend approval, it will return the proposal to the submitting department for revision/resubmission via the vice provost.

Department Response; the submitting department may:

• revise and resubmit the proposal based on CPAC recommendations;
• resubmit the proposal, with a written explanation, directly to the UAC/GAC without adjustment for a vote; or,
• withdraw the proposal.

3. UAC/GAC Action

The UAC/GAC reviews and votes on the proposal. UAC/GAC’s recommendation will be presented to the vice provost for recordation.

4. Vice Provost Action

The vice provost will document the UAC/GAC decisions.

Approved proposals involving minor revisions of a program will be implemented and listed in university catalog of the following academic year.

Approved proposals involving new programs or substantive revision to an existing program will be forwarded to the Academic Senate for approval.

5. Academic Senate

Academic Senate votes on the proposal.

If the Academic Senate approves the proposal, the vice provost will document the decision and forward the proposal to the provost for further review.

If the Academic Senate does not approve the proposal, the proposal will be returned to the submitting department for revision and possible resubmission. The Academic Senate will notify UAC/GAC of any proposals that are not approved. Revised proposals must be resubmitted to CPAC and UAC/GAC for review.

6. Provost

The provost, or designee, in coordination with the vice provost, will review the proposal.

If the provost approves the proposal, the vice provost will document the decision and forward the proposal to the president for further review.

If the provost does not approve the proposal, the proposal will be returned to the submitting department for revision and possible resubmission. The provost will notify Academic Senate and UAC/GAC of any proposals that are not approved. Revised proposals must be resubmitted to CPAC, UAC/GAC and Academic Senate for review.

7. University President

The University President will review new program proposals and approve/disapprove.

If the president approves the proposal, the vice provost will document the decision.

If the president does not approve the proposal, the proposal will be returned to the submitting department for revision and possible resubmission. The president will notify the provost and Academic Senate of any proposals that are not approved. Revised proposals must be resubmitted to CPAC, UAC/GAC, Academic Senate and the provost for review.

8. External Review

All new programs and some substantively changed programs must undergo an external review process as noted in Appendix A.

Chapter 6 – Certificate Programs

6-1. Introduction

A certificate is a focused collection of courses that affords the student some record of coherent academic accomplishment in a given discipline or set of related disciplines.

A certificate is not a degree. Students are awarded a certificate upon completion of the defined program of coursework.

A graduate certificate is not a means of entry into a graduate degree program. While the courses comprising a graduate certificate may be used as evidence in support of a student’s application for admission to a graduate degree program, the certificate itself is not considered to be a prerequisite.

Proposals for new certificate programs will follow the policies for review of new programs (Chapter 5).

New certificate programs in areas where joint programs are conducted with other universities will be endorsed by the collaborating departments at the other institution.

An appropriate number of credit hours must comprise the certificate program. Ordinarily, the credit requirement for any graduate certificate program will range from 12 to 20 graduate credit hours. The number of credits may not be less than 12 or more than one-half of the credits necessary for a related master’s degree from EWU. If a discipline specific certificate requires credits greater than one-half of a related master’s degree, departments must demonstrate the rationale for the higher number of credits at the time of certificate proposal.  Undergraduate certificate programs may not be less than 15 or more than 30 credit hours.

All certificate programs will be reviewed within the course of regular program assessment and review, as defined by the university.

Chapter 7 – Course and Program Banking and Discontinuance

7-1. Banked Courses

1. Banking a Course
   • Courses may be banked in either of the following cases:
     1. at the request of a department or program through their chair or director, with the approval of the vice provost.
     2. when the course has not been taught during the past 12 quarters (including summer session). In such cases, the vice provost must notify the department or program.
2. Catalog Listing:
   • Banked courses will not be listed in the university catalog.
3. Extensions:
   • Departments and programs may request an extension for an additional 4 quarters due to extenuating circumstances affecting faculty workloads. Such circumstances may include administrative or research responsibilities, retirements or medical emergencies. Extensions will be granted at the discretion of the vice provost.
4. Retrieving a Banked Course:
   • To retrieve a banked course, the department or program must submit a request to the vice provost. The request to retrieve a banked course must be approved by the department chair and appropriate college dean. The request must include:
     1. The term and year the course was last taught.
     2. A new syllabus for the course.
     3. A statement of justification for having the course unbanked.
     4. The next term the course will be offered.

Upon review by the vice provost, the request will be forwarded to UAC/GAC for further approval. Requests approved by UAC/GAC will be documented by the vice provost and the course listed in the university catalog the following academic year.  Requests not approved by UAC/GAC must be resubmitted as a new course proposal.

7.2 Banked Programs

Degree programs may be banked at the request of a department or program through their chair or director, with the approval of the dean and the vice provost.

Requests to retrieve a banked degree program must follow the policies for substantive revisions to programs (Chapter 5).

7-3. Course Discontinuation

Courses that have not been taught in the past 24 quarters (including summer session) will be automatically discontinued and their course numbers will become available for new courses. Future reinstatement of a discontinued course must follow the policies for new course proposals (Chapter 5).

7-4. Program Discontinuation

Proposals for the discontinuation of degree programs may be initiated by departments, appropriate university committees (such as UAC, GAC, and the Program Review Committee (PRC)), and/or administrative officers of the university.

All proposals must specify mechanisms to protect the interests of students currently enrolled in such programs and to allow those students to complete their degrees in a reasonable time period.

Proposals for degree program discontinuation must include a declaration of intent with rationale for such a recommendation:

1. degree program discontinuation, or,
2. discontinuation of degree program with department dissolution.

All proposals must comply with the requirements of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Proposals for consolidating options within a given degree that allow the students to still obtain the same or a comparable degree are not included in this process but follow the normal program revision process.

All proposals for program discontinuance shall be forwarded to the Program Review Committee (PRC) for review.

The PRC, operating under the criteria currently in place, must seek broad consultations with groups or persons likely to be affected by the degree program discontinuation, including students enrolled in the affected degree program, the department(s) housing the program and the appropriate dean(s). The PRC will select a finite set of data according to the 1998 criteria to be collected yearly by the Office of Institutional Research. If the PRC finds that the proposal has no merit, then this recommendation together with the original proposal must be forwarded to the Provost.

If the PRC finds that the proposal has merit, then the PRC will send a recommendation to UAC/GAC. The UAC/GAC will, after giving consideration to the PRC recommendation, make a recommendation to the Rules Committee.

The Rules Committee will, after giving consideration to the UAC/GAC recommendation, make a recommendation to the Academic Senate.

The entire record will be sent to the Academic Senate. The record consists of the recommendations from the PRC, UAC/GAC, and the Rules Committee as well as a summary of the data used to arrive at a recommendation. The Academic Senate will, after giving consideration to the entire record, make a recommendation to the President.

All proposals and recommendations shall be forwarded to the Provost.

The Provost forwards an independent recommendation to the President.

The President makes a recommendation to the Board of Trustees (BOT).

The BOT takes final action.

The recommendations made by the UAC/GAC, Rules Committee and the Academic Senate must be forwarded to the appropriate body/person after four (4) consecutive regular meetings of the said group. If no recommendation is forwarded by any one of these groups the recommendation from the previous group is the recommendation that is forwarded.

Chapter 8 – Courses in Distance Education

8-1. Introduction

Distance education courses will adhere to the NWCCU Distance Education Policy. The US Department of Education classifies Distance Education as education that uses technology (such as the internet, audio conference, or other media) to deliver instruction to students who are separated from the instructor(s).

8-2. Distance Education Course Approval

The following courses are categorized as Distance Education.

1. New courses: Creation of a new course to be taught only in a distance education formal will be governed by the existing course approval process delineated in AP 303-35, Chapter 5. In addition, approval of a new course to be taught only in a distance education format requires the following justification:
   1. Demonstration that the course will provide regular and substantive interaction between the students and the instructor;
   2. Evidence of the technological infrastructure and resources needed to support the delivery of the course in a distance education format; and,
   3. Evidence that the course content and assessment methods are appropriate for distance education.
2. Existing courses: A course that has been previously approved by AP 303-35, Chapter 5 may be transitioned to be taught periodically or only in a distance education format. An existing course that will be taught in a distance education format requires:
   1. Demonstration that the course will provide regular and substantive interaction between the students and the instructor;
   2. Evidence of the technological infrastructure and resources needed to support the delivery of the course in a distance education format;
   3. Evidence that the course content and assessment methods are appropriate for distance education; and
   4. In the case of a course that is transitioned to be taught only in a distance education format, justification for the switch to be taught only in a distance education format and evidence; or
   5. In the case of a course that is to be taught periodically in a distance education format, evidence that the course meets the same academic standards as its face-to-face equivalent.

8-3. Roles of Campus Partners

GAC and UAC develop policy recommendations relative to academic program and course management. CPACs review and approve new courses or changes to existing courses, including change in mode of delivery.

The faculty member assigned to teach or design the course must undergo training in online course design and delivery to ensure that the course meets the standards of regular and substantive interaction as required by the DOE. A faculty member who has completed the required EWU training within the last four years or a faculty member who has completed the required EWU training (at any time) and has taught in the distance learning format within the last four years may opt out of the training.

EWU Instructional Technology and Webs Services (ITWS) is a partner in the process. As described by the CBA, faculty shall work with ITWS to ensure that the courses are accessible, consistent with applicable law, and that they function within our Learning Management System (LMS), ITWS will design and deliver the faculty training.

Appendix A – External Coordination & Approval

This appendix describes the process mentioned in Chapter 5-3 (Section 8. External Review). This process normally begins while internal review is ongoing. New academic programs and some substantively changed programs must undergo an external review process as described in this appendix.  The Vice Provost will work with the appropriate academic department(s) to prepare and submit such proposals.

1. Using ICAPP’s Guidelines for Proposals, the submitting department/program will complete the ICAPP proposal and forward it to the appropriate academic dean for review.  The ICAPP guide is available through the vice provost’s office.
2. Proposals approved by the academic dean will be forwarded to the vice provost and then to the provost for review.
3. Proposals requiring revision will be returned to the submitting department/program.  Revised proposals must be resubmitted to the vice provost within three weeks.
4. Revised proposals that are approved by the vice provost are forwarded to the provost for final review.
5. As part of the ICAPP process, proposals approved by the provost will be sent to the Council of Presidents (COP) for posting on the COP website.  The vice provost will coordinate this process and endeavor to submit the COP proposal at the same time the proposal is sent to UAC/GAC for review.
6. Proposals approved through the COP vetting process will be documented in the vice provost’s office, archived, distributed to appropriate campus offices, and prepared for catalog publication.  Proposals rejected by the COP will be returned to the submitting department/program for revision and possible resubmission.
7. COP-approved programs will also be forwarded to the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities for approval.
8. The Washington Student Achievement Council (WSAC) will be notified of all approved programs.