Criteria and Process for Selection of External Reviewers

The role of the external reviewers is important in the program review process.  Each program review includes a visit by two (or more) external reviewers, one chosen from a national pool and one from a local pool.  The external reviewers promote comparison with similar programs at other institutions, provide faculty and administrators a wider perspective, and ensure that the academic program being reviewed is not isolated from the larger academic community.  The external reviewers prompt academic units and the university to address issues that may come to light during the program review process, and facilitate an institutional and program response to the program review. 

External reviewers, as recognized experts in the disciplinary/professional field of the unit undertaking program review, are used to provide critical judgment and to ensure the objectivity of the program review process, and to determine how the program compares to other programs in the region and nation.

Reviewers should bring an informed and unbiased view to the assessment of the program. External reviewers should consider whether the plans of the department are appropriate, considering such factors as the current condition of the program, trends in the discipline, the nature of the faculty, and the characteristics of the students and the community the program serves. Reviewers may be provided with a list of issues/questions to be addressed in their report, but they are free to address other issues that arise during the course of their review.

Academic units should recommend the names of at least two (and no more than five) national external reviewers and at least two (and no more than five) local external reviewers to the Office of the Chancellor.  The academic unit should submit a separate nomination for each potential external reviewer, using the External Reviewer Nomination Form.  The Office of the Chancellor will select the two external reviewers in consultation with the academic unit and the Office of the Dean.  

Academic units should nominate individuals who are active, respected members of the discipline and profession, particularly in the academic programs and areas of interest of the unit undertaking program review.

Academic units should nominate reviewers who are likely to understand the issues and special circumstances of the academic unit and Chapman University, particularly those who come from or have experience in programs similar to those of the academic unit and institutions which are regarded as peers of Chapman University. 

If the academic unit includes separate programs or areas (for example, undergraduate and graduate programs), the unit should recommend external reviewers who are most appropriate for specified programs or areas.  The academic unit should take care to recommend reviewers who will provide a balance in representing the programs and areas of the unit. 

If a program review is being conducted in anticipation of a subsequent professional accreditation review, the academic unit may nominate specific individuals who have a thorough knowledge of the standards, criteria, and processes that will be used in the professional accreditation review.

The academic unit, in nominating external reviewers, should attempt to maintain a balance in gender and minority representation. 

Academic units should NOT nominate external reviewers with potential conflicts of interest in conducting the program review, including:

• Former or current mentors or friends of faculty members
• Faculty members or administrators who are currently employed or who have been employed at Chapman University, or who have applied for positions or are likely to apply for positions at Chapman University
• Faculty members or administrators from academic programs and universities in immediate competition with the programs of the academic unit and Chapman University

The academic unit, in nominating external reviewers, should describe in succinct detail on the nomination form the qualifications that make the recommended external reviewer an appropriate site visitor for the academic unit. The academic unit should indicate any relevant academic and professional experience qualifying the individual as an external reviewer.  The unit should attach a vita or résumé of the nominee if available, or a copy of biographical information from a published source (for example, Who’s Who, American Men and Women of Science).  The academic unit should provide sufficient information to guide the Office of the Chancellor and the Dean in selecting effective reviewers.

Academic units should NOT contact the individuals recommended on the nomination form, or solicit vitae or biographical information from potential external reviewers, until the Office of the Chancellor has selected the external reviewers in consultation with the academic unit and Dean.  Premature contact with potential external reviewers may create an awkward situation for the university and for those individuals not invited to serve as external reviewers.