University Campuses Undergraduate Curriculum Coordination

Updated May 27, 2021

Introduction

Executive Order IV, Policy Directory, Faculty Code and Governance, Chapter 13 Section 13-23.C: Legislative Authority of the Faculty (3 February 2004) requires the President to refer the following types of undergraduate program changes to the Faculty Senate for coordinated faculty review by all three campuses: undergraduate degrees, majors, minors, or other transcriptable programs, or substantive changes to the same, regardless of campus of origin. The purpose of this process is to enhance the quality of undergraduate course offerings through peer review, promote coordination and communication among the colleges, schools, and campuses, and to promote faculty collaboration that can lead to greater quality and optimal use of resources. This memo describes the process for carrying out the University Campuses Review Process. Please note, however, that no campus has the power or authority to veto a program or program change proposed by another campus. Finally, this review is designed to generate feedback at a point in time where the proposals are developed but not approved so that the originating campus can make full use of any feedback that is provided.

Process

• Stage 0: Notice of Proposal
• Stage I: Review of Developed Proposals
• Stage II

Stage 0: Notice of Proposal

1. Each campus has the responsibility to develop its own curricular offerings. In order to facilitate coordination of substantive changes to their curriculum, a unit planning to offer a new undergraduate degree, major, minor, option, or other transcriptable credential or substantive change¹ to any of these, should prepare a Notice of Proposal (NOP). If a unit is uncertain whether or not a change is substantive, they should contact the campus-specific curriculum review committee.
2. Once a unit has drafted an NOP, and had it approved by the appropriate administrators in its School or College, the document should be sent electronically to the University Curriculum Office. Staff will conduct a preliminary review to assure that appropriate information and approvals have been included. Once that review has been completed, the Curriculum Office will inform the appropriate campus academic program review committee that an NOP has been submitted.
3. The NOP will be posted electronically for review. The proposal shall be available for review for 10 business days before it can be submitted to the campus-specific curriculum review process.
4. Simultaneously with the posting of the proposal, the University Curriculum Office shall notify (1) the voting faculty of all UW campuses, (2) Office of the Provost, (3) the Deans, Directors, and Chairs, (4) the Chair of each campus academic program review committee, (5) the academic advisers of each campus, and (6) the Chair of the Faculty Council on Tri-campus Policy informing them of the opportunity to review the curriculum proposal.
5. If there are no significant comments to be resolved, or if they have been resolved, the unit may go forward with developing the proposal. A record of the NOP will be kept electronically that is password protected, including comments made during the early notice period.
6. Once a full proposal has been developed, the NOP will be included in the official university-wide full tri-campus review.

Stage I: Review of Developed Proposals

1. Following the university-wide NOP review and after a campus unit develops and approves a curricular offering, it should be forwarded to the appropriate academic program review committee for that campus.²
2. An NOP completing tri-campus review is valid for fifteen calendar months after the month the NOP completes tri-campus review. For example: an NOP completing tri-campus review any time in May is valid through the end of August of the following year. A program proposal submitted to the University Curriculum Office after the NOP is no longer valid requires a new NOP submission by the unit.
3. The academic program review committee of each campus shall make an initial determination that the proposal is sufficiently developed to merit academic program review.³ It shall also determine whether the proposed change meets the guidelines for tri-campus review.⁴ If a campus academic program review committee has questions about the applicability of the Tri-campus review process, they should consult the University Registrar.
1. If the proposal meets this threshold, it shall be forwarded immediately to the University Curriculum Office. Materials to be forwarded to the University Curriculum Office must include, in electronic form:
1. A completed university curriculum form
2. The rationale for the proposal
2. If the proposal is not complete, it shall be returned by the University Curriculum Office to the unit of origin for further development.
4. When the University Curriculum Office receives the completed program proposal, it will be immediately posted electronically for review. The proposal shall be available for review for 15 business days.⁵
5. Simultaneously with the posting of the proposal, the University Curriculum Office shall notify (1) the voting faculty of all UW campuses, (2) the Deans, Directors, and Chairs and (3) the Chair of each campus academic program review committee informing them of the opportunity to review the curriculum proposal.

At the end of the comment period, the University Curriculum Office shall compile all comments made on the proposal and forward the comments to the Chair of the academic program review committee at the originating campus. That committee shall then consider all comments as part of their academic program review process and shall provide a summary of responses to the comments received from all campuses.

Stage II

1. The originating campus academic program review committee will obtain final campus approvals on the final proposal.
2. When final campus approval has been received the proposal will be forwarded by the appropriate campus official to the University Curriculum Office.
3. The University Curriculum Office will forward the final proposal to the President for final action and transmittal to the appropriate dean/chancellor and Chair of the Faculty Senate. Matters of non-adherence to procedures or unresolved issues related to comments received will be the responsibility of the President.

---

¹ Substantive changes requiring an NOP include, but are not limited to:

1. Changes that would alter the degree information that appears on a student transcript, for example, new or changed degree titles, minors, or options, etc.
2. Changing admission type, for example, from minimum requirements to capacity constrained
3. Any change in a program on one campus that could significantly alter enrollments in specific programs on one of the other two campuses, for example changing the format of a program to distance learning or fee-based offering.
4. Any change, at the discretion of the Office of the University Registrar, warranting tri-campus review

² UW, Seattle: Faculty Council on Academic Standards (FCAS)
UW, Bothell: General Faculty Organization
UW, Tacoma: Faculty Assembly

³ The originating campus' academic program review committee will review its own proposals, and should consider the following elements, using its own processes and criteria:

• Fit with campus and university mission
• Academic quality
• Need
• Effects on students
• Effects on other programs
• Feasibility/operational viability
• Adherence to University and Campus policies

⁴ As stated in the Executive Order, tri-campus review is required for new undergraduate degrees, majors, minors, and certificate programs, or substantive changes to the same of a non-routine nature. This includes, but may not be limited to:

1. Changes that would alter the degree information that appears on a student transcript, for example, new or changed degree titles, minors, or options, etc.
2. Changes in pre-requisites that would significantly increase or decrease the number of students admitted to the major, minor, or option.
3. Changes in graduation requirements that would significantly increase or decrease the number of students completing the major, minor, or option.
4. Any change in a program on one campus that could significantly alter enrollments in specific programs on one of the other two campuses, for example changing the format of a program to distance learning or fee-based offering.

⁵ The Registrar may grant a 5-business day extension of this deadline to any individual who submits a written request to the Registrar prior to the end of the original comment period.