»Graduate Curriculum Handbook

New Graduate Degree Program Proposal Process 2025-2026.pdf

The review and approval of new graduate degree is a comprehensive process requiring extensive documentation, appropriate consultation recommendations within academic units, review by the university Councils, concurrence by the Senate Executive Board, a recommendation regarding approval by the Faculty Senate, and approval by the Provost and the Board of Trustees. All required consultations and recommendations for approvals are to be documented using the New Degree Program Form found in the Appendix-Forms section of this Handbook.

IMPORTANT. Proposed new graduate degrees may require submission of a substantive change proposal to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), who serve as the regional accrediting body for Chapman. Academic units considering a new graduate degree program proposal must consult with the Office of Accreditation and Assessment before submitting a new program proposal. If WASC’s substantive change policies and procedures require the submission of information about new programs, the Office of Accreditation and Assessment will provide the current information on the process.

If the New graduate degree program being proposed also includes a New Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Degree Program, please refer to that section of the Handbook for specific information to be provided for the Integrated programs.

The University's academic requirements for graduate degree programs are provided in the graduate catalog, which should be consulted when designing any new graduate degree program. A summary is also provided in the Degree Requirements section of this Handbook.

General Guidelines for the New Degree Program Proposal

Preparation

A proposed new graduate degree program will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

• The demonstrated need and demand for the proposed new degree
• Its alignment with the university’s mission and the academic strategic plan
• The benefits of offering the degree at the University
• The academic quality of the proposed degree program, including delivery, outcomes, and assessment
• The cost of the degree and the use of institutional resources

Originator(s): Proposals for new graduate degree programs generally originate from the academic unit that will offer the new degree program. Proposals also may originate from other academic units or administrators. However, all such programs require the support of program faculty when such faculty are in place and will be contributing to the program.

Documentation: All new degree program proposal information must be placed in the file-sharing folder created by the Office of the Associate Vice Provost for Graduate Education for the specific new degree program proposal. Contact Lonnise Magallanez at GradEd@chapman.edu, and the folder will be established for the proposal. Links to the documents in the file folder can then be shared with all parties needing review access. The New Proposal form found in the Appendix-Forms is included in this file sharing folder, to be signed by each required person representing the consultative office, faculty councils, and senate.

Consultation: should occur with the following offices and individuals, as appropriate, during the proposal preparation stage:

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education to ensure that academic policies are being followed in degree design
• Office of Strategic Marketing and Communication for information on the marketing potential of the new degree program (addressed in Executive Summary, Appendices A, I)
• Assistant Provost for Operations and Finance regarding budget (addressed in Appendices C-I)
• Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness and Faculty Advancement and the Director of Accreditation and Assessment regarding accreditation and assessment (determination of whether or not substantive change filing with WASC is required and addressed in Appendices A and B)
• Vice President for Enrollment Management regarding projected enrollments and financial aid/scholarships (addressed in Appendices A and H)
• Office of Graduate Admission regarding recruitment and enrollments (addressed in Appendices A, H, and I)
• Library Liaison regarding information resources (addressed in Appendix D)
• Vice President for IS&T regarding computing and technology needs (addressed in Appendix E)
• Office of the EVP/COO (if new proposal is a new international or joint program with another institution). Note that any such program requires a substantive change application to WASC and should follow the WASC Substantive Change: New Degree Program process.
• Office of Legal Affairs (if new proposal is a new international or joint program with another institution).

Each office listed above must provide documentation that the consultation occurred, and such documentation should be filed in the appropriate Appendix folder in the shared folder assigned by the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education for the New Degree Program Proposal.

The consultation is an opportunity to gain input from relevant offices and personnel and make appropriate adjustments to the proposal before the academic unit considers the final proposal for recommendation.

Academic Unit decisions: The recommendations on approval by the academic unit is required by the following parties and individuals:

• Representative of program/department faculty
• Academic unit curriculum committee
• Dean

Each party listed above can submit a position memorandum for their recommendation on approval. These memoranda are to be filed in the New Program file sharing folder set up for this purpose, to which all reviewing parties will have access. The memorandum is required from a party in case of recommendation to reject the proposal. Recommendations and memoranda are required by the standard deadline, April 1.

Reviews

After April 1, the original New Program shared folder will be available for review only. Any subsequent recommendations, responses, and changes should be submitted to a separate shared folder, New Program proposal review, linked to the New Program proposal’s folder.

University Councils: Subsequent reviews and recommendations on approval are required from the following:

• Graduate Academic Council (and, if necessary, Undergraduate Academic Council)
• Long Range Planning Council

The Councils will identify relevant academic, strategic, and budgetary issues and will prepare summative reports detailing:

• the alignment of the proposed degree program with the Academic Strategic Plan
• analysis of the resources requested
• the Council’s recommendations

Councils may request feedback from the program/department and/or academic unit involved in the proposal process before submitting the council’s recommendations.

Following the review, each council submits its report to the New Program proposal review shared folder and documents the recommendation on the New Proposal form.

Upon completion of their reviews, the Councils:

• forward all relevant information and recommendation reports to Senate Executive Board;
• inform the following parties of their recommendations:
  • Program/department faculty
  • Academic Unit Curriculum Committee
  • Dean
  • Associate Vice President for Graduate Education
  • Provost

Senate: The Senate Executive Board will then submit, with their own recommendation (optional), all information to the Faculty Senate. Faculty Senate members will be provided access to the shared folders with the New Program proposal and reviews.

Upon vote of the Faculty Senate, the Faculty Senate President will forward the recommendation for approval or disapproval to the Provost and notify all prior parties of the decision.

The Provost reviews the recommendations by the faculty senate, and if the Provost recommends the new degree program for approval, further reviews will be arranged by the following:

• Academic Committee of the Board of Trustees
• Finance Committee of the Board of Trustees
• Full Board of Trustees

While specific steps in the curriculum proposal process for new academic programs may be undertaken simultaneously, curriculum proposals for new degree programs will not be presented to the relevant Board of Trustees committees and the entire Board of Trustees until all required previous steps have been taken, consultations verified, and recommendations for approval or disapproval are made.

The Board of Trustees provides final approval on all new degree programs.

New Degree Program Proposal Content Guidelines

The proposal should consist of a 2 to 3 page executive summary that explains the high points of the proposed degree program and appendices that explain the details. Each appendix should begin with a brief narrative summary of the contents of the appendix. The proposal should also include a table of contents corresponding to the requirements below.

Electronic copies of all required documents in the proposal sections (including all supporting documents in electronic format) are placed in a file sharing system folder created for the NewProgram proposal.

Special requirements for Joint and Interdisciplinary programs and degrees require additional review and recommendations for approval by all programs and academic units involved. In order to provide for the appropriate approvers to be included in the proposal process and on the proposal form for signature, please work with the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education to set up the appropriate customized form for acknowledgment of consultation and recommendations for approval from all parties for these proposals.

The detailed proposal should include the following sections addressing the questions below. The New Program proposal folder in the file-sharing system has subfolders for each category in which information should be uploaded:

• Executive Summary
• Appendix A: Description
  • Narrative
  • Required Assessment Information (PLOs, ALOAR/Sec. 1, Curriculum Map)
  • Required analysis of Gainful Employment Rule
• Appendix B: Curriculum
  • General Curriculum Information
  • New Course Syllabi (separate file for each course)
  • Existing/Revised Course Syllabi (separate file for each course)
• Appendix C: Faculty
  • General Faculty Information
  • Faculty Curriculum Vitae (separate file for each faculty member)
• Appendix D: Library Information
• Appendix E: Information and Computing Resources
• Appendix F: Facilities Needs
• Appendix G: Staff and Administrative Support Needs
• Appendix H: Student Support Needs
• Appendix I: Projected 5-Year Budget
• Memoranda regarding recommendations from:
  • Program/Department Faculty Representative
  • Curriculum Committee(s) governing academic unit
  • Dean for the academic unit
  • Graduate Academic Council and, if necessary, Undergraduate Academic Council
  • Long Range Planning Council
  • Senate Executive Board (not required)
  • Faculty Senate President representing Faculty Senate

Below is detailed information regarding what is required in each section and the Appendix of the proposal. If [WASC] is indicated, it refers to information required by the WASC Senior Colleges and Universities Commission for accreditation purposes.

Executive Summary (2-3 pages):

• Name of the proposed degree
• Rationale for why the degree is being proposed. Specifically, what need or purpose does the degree fill for the University, the academic unit, the discipline/field, and/or the student body?
• Explanation of how the proposed degree fits the needs of the University and how this program connects with the mission, purpose, and strategic plan of the University and with the strategic plan of the academic unit. [WASC]
• Summary of the reputational and financial impact of the proposed program on the University (Detailed information is to be provided in Appendices A and I)
• Name/position of the primary person overseeing the new program or degree. This includes the person or persons responsible for:
  • annual accreditation reports,
  • program reviews, and
  • contact the Office of the University Registrar and the Office of Graduate Education for other program- and degree-related questions.
• If this is a joint or interdisciplinary degree:
  • identify which program/department will be responsible for annual accreditation reports and program reviews.
  • address how courses and programmatic changes are to be reviewed and approved. Unless special conditions exist, both academic units and programs/departments should be required to approve programmatic changes, both simple and complex, and this should be noted in this summary. It is possible that a separate Curriculum Committee should be established specific to this degree. If this is needed, explain why this is needed, and who will serve on this new Curriculum Committee.
• Summarize the demand for this degree, how the demand was determined and what methods were used to collect evidence to support demand. The originator and program/department faculty and/or academic unit should conduct a needs assessment that supports the new degree program proposal to address these questions and provide a summary here. Add a summary explanation of how the program will fit into the revised Financial Value Transparency and Gainful Employment regulations. (Detailed information is to be provided in Appendix A.) Program faculty and/or administrators should consult with the Vice President and Dean for Enrollment Management for assistance in providing evidence and justifications for the demand for the degree. [WASC]
• Describe the targeted recruitment audience and processes for advertising and recruiting students. (Financial resources committed to marketing the program should be clearly explained in the budget in Appendix I). Program faculty should consult with the Vice President for Strategic Marketing and Communications on these matters and web site design and maintenance. [WASC]
• Describe the admissions criteria and processes for admitting students. Program faculty should consult with the Vice President and Dean for Enrollment Management and appropriate Graduate Admission staff.
• Discuss the planning process for the proposed degree, including who was involved– faculty, staff, students, alumni, community members, and others—in planning the new degree. Describe all of the constituents involved in the planning process.
• Discuss how the degree fits within the academic unit’s current degrees. How will the proposed degree impact other degrees within the academic unit? (Detailed information is to be provided in Appendix C.) Does the degree replace other degrees offered by the academic unit? If so, the program/department and the academic unit must submit a concurrent proposal for the closure of the degrees being replaced.
• Discuss how theproposed degreecompares to other degrees identified by theacademic unitand/or program/departmentin thedisciplineor fieldand how theproposed degree compares to thestandards and guidelines (if any) of disciplinary/professional associationsin thefield. If theproposed degreeresponds to recommendations and concerns identified in theprogram/department’s last program review, identify therecommendation made.
• If applicable, explain the academic unit and/or program/department’s plan for meeting professional accreditation and/or certification requirements and indicate the anticipated date of the accreditation request and approval.
• Discuss whether or not this New Program will result in a substantive change to WASC accreditation based on consultation with the Vice President of Institutional Effectiveness and Faculty Advancement and/or the Director of Accreditation & Assessment.
• If necessary (e.g., when the program is international or requires collaborating with other institutions), the originator and/or the program/department faculty must consult with the Office of the Executive Vice President/Chief Operating Officer and the Office of Legal Affairs to identify and resolve any potential legal issues, which should be discussed here.

Note: The information requested in the Executive Summary is to be provided in one file, and the information required in Appendices A through I, as described below, should be in separate files. In some cases (i.e., Appendix C, Faculty), the Appendix may be a folder containing separate files. Please review the file sharing system template and use appropriate naming conventions for any files created.

Appendices

• Appendix A. Detailed Description of the Proposed Degree and Need for Program
• Appendix B. Curriculum
• Appendix C. Faculty
• Appendix D. Library Resources
• Appendix E. Information and Computing Resources
• Appendix F. Instructional and Research Facilities and Equipment
• Appendix G. Staff and Administrative Support
• Appendix H. Student Support/Resources
• Appendix I. Projected Five-Year Budget

Board of Trustees New Program Proposal Presentation

Academic units submitting new program proposals that are recommended by approval by the Senate and the Provost are advised to prepare a presentation (e.g., using PowerPoint) for the Board of Trustees that summarizes the following points:

• The name and type of proposed degree.
• The academic unit and/or program/department offering the degree
• A rationale for offering the program or degree, including the projected demand/enrollments and the planning process that went into developing the new degree.
• A description of how the degree fits into the missions and strategic plans of the university, the academic unit, and/or the program/department
• A brief description of the degree, including its curriculum, faculty, and required resources.
• A summary of how the degree compares with existing relevant degrees at Chapman University or competing universities.
• Plans/timelines for implementation and for meeting any accreditation requirements.
• A summary of the five-year budget, including projected enrollments, revenues, and expenditures. The budget must be reviewed by the Long Range Planning Council, the Executive Vice President/Chief Operating Officer, and the Provost.

On occasion, the Board of Trustees may be informed of degree proposals in development prior to receiving Graduate Academic Council, Long Range Planning Council, Senate Executive Board, or Senate approval. Presenters must be clear about the status of each degree proposal when making their presentations. That is, only proposals that have received recommendations for approval from the Faculty Senate and the Provost should be presented to the Board of Trustees for a vote.

New Joint Degree Proposal Process 2024-2025.pdf

Joint degree programs are shared programs between or among more than one academic unit.

The proposals for new joint degree programs should follow the guidelines for new program proposals described above and include the same additional information required for the interdisciplinary degree (Appendix C, Curriculum).

Any joint degree program with another institution requires a substantive change filing with WASC and input from the Vice President/Chief Operations Officer and the Office of Legal Affairs.

Contact the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education at GradEd@chapman.edufor any special instructions regarding the proposal of a new joint degree.

New Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Program Process 2025-2026.pdf

An integrated program combines undergraduate and graduate education by allowing the

undergraduatestudent to beconditionally admitted into thegraduateprogram whilestill completing all undergraduatedegreerequirements. Theapplication process,admission prerequisitesand requirements, and graduateprogram requirements areas specified for each graduateprogram. However, aGPA minimum of 3.0 is required for acceptanceinto an integrated program, even in cases whereaMaster’s programconsiders lower GPA requirements for admission. Students will receiveconditional admission to thegraduateprogram, pending completion of their bachelor’s degreeas stipulated in theGraduateCatalog.

While still enrolled as undergraduates, students may take and share up to 15 credits. However, some programs may permit to share less than 15 credits.

In the term after receiving the undergraduate degree, students who satisfy the requirements of conditional acceptance matriculate into the Graduate program and complete the remaining credit hours of graduate coursework.

At a minimum, 15 credits must be earned at the graduate, post-baccalaureate level. The minimum number of 135 combined undergraduate and graduate credits is required for any integrated bachelor's/master's program.

Integrated Program Proposal Content and approval process

Proposal for a New Integrated Program should use the New Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Program Form found in the Appendix-Formssection of this Handbook. The information required for the proposals is listed in the form.

Required recommendations on approval of integrated programs should be completed by the deadline for submission of the proposal, November 15:

• Graduate and undergraduate program/department faculty representative (both program/department faculty if programs/departments differ)
• Academic unit curriculum committee chair (both academic unit curriculum committees if academic units differ)
• Dean (both academic unit deans if academic units differ)

Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Programs require review and approval by both the GAC and the UAC, as well as final approval by the Provost. The deadline for submission of the catalog entry for the newly approved program is February 1.

If an integrated program is being proposed as part of a new degree program under the new degree program proposal process, it may be submitted along with the new degree program. The approval process for the Integrated Program may begin in fall, and “provisional approval,” if given, will be provided pending the final result of the New Degree Program approval process by the Board of Trustees.

New Emphasis or Credential Process 2025-2026.pdf

A new emphasis, or credential may be added to an existing degree program. Chapman University policy regarding Graduate Program Emphasis:

All organized subsections of a graduate program shall be named emphases. The number of credits in the new courses specific for the emphasis must not exceed 40 percent of the program requirement. There must be a minimum of 12 credits in the emphasis.

The completed proposal should be uploaded to the shared folder created for the proposal by the Office of Associate Vice President for Graduate Education. The proposal documentation includes a completed New Graduate Emphasis or Specialization Form (in the Appendix-Formssection of this Handbook) and accompanying documents described below.

The information required for the proposals is listed in the form.

The deadline for filing a proposal for a new emphasis or credential to be added to an existing degree program is November 15.

The submission process requires consultation completed before the submission deadline (and documented on the proposal form) with the following:

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education to ensure that academic policies are being followed in degree design
• Director of Accreditation and Assessment regarding accreditation and assessment issues Recommendations on approval are required by the following before the submission deadline:
• Program/department faculty representative
• Academic Unit Curriculum Committee
• Dean

Proposals for new emphasis or credential are reviewed by the Graduate Academic Council. The final decision on approval is given by the Provost.

New Certificate for Academic Credit 2025-2026.pdf

A certificate program that enrolls students for academic credit can originate with faculty members or administrators and must be reviewed and a recommendation on approval provided by the appropriate academic unit curriculum committee, the program/unit faculty, and the dean of the unit. The proposal for the certificate is then submitted to the Graduate Academic Council, accompanied by position memos from the program/department faculty, the academic unit curriculum committee (required), and the Dean (optional).

The deadline for filing a new Certificate for Academic Credit proposal is November 15.

Timely consultation and supporting documentation will ensure the curriculum proposal is reviewed expeditiously. Consultation should occur with the following, as appropriate:

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education to ensure that academic policies are being followed in certificate design
• Vice Provost of Operations and Finance
• Director of Accreditation and Assessment regarding accreditation and assessment issues specific to certificates

Review for recommendation on the proposal is required by the following:

• Representative of program/department faculty
• Academic unit curriculum committee
• Dean
• Graduate Academic Council

The final approval decision is given by the Provost.

New certificates for academic credit are filed using the New Certificate for Academic Credit Proposal form found in the Appendix-Formssection of this Handbook.

The information required for the proposals is listed in the form and should be attached to the proposal form.

New Extended Education Certificates (Not for Academic Credit) 2025-2026.pdf

Note: this section is provided for informational purposes only. Faculty councils, faculty senate, or the provost do not review non-credited programs.

Extended Education programs that result in non-academic certificates of completion are operated within individual schools and colleges. The Office of Provost supports quality and compliance in extended education programs and courses.

Any school or college seeking a new extended education course or program must have the course/program reviewed by the Office of the Provost. Please contact the Vice Provost of Operations and Finance, who will provide details on the approval process.

Extended Education programs are not listed in the catalog, nor are the courses recorded on a student’s undergraduate or graduate academic transcript.

As non-academic programs, Extended Education programs do not require review from the Graduate Academic Councils.

Revisions of Existing Programs Process 2025-2026.pdf

The revision of academic programs is handled entirely through the Curriculogprogram proposal revision process. Should assistance be required, please contact the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education GradEd@chapman.eduprior to submission.

Program revision in brief

Program revisions are of two distinct types:

Complex revisions are the change(s) that include any of the following:

• change in core courses (more than 25% overall of core course credits),
• addition or removal of a program requirement,
• change in the core structure of the degree,
• change in total number of credits,
• change in a current program requirement (for entry or completion) that lowers the requirement below the university-wide standard
• change in the name of a program,
• change in the CIP code of a program,
• changes that are significant and may have implications for accreditation.

Proposals for complex revisions must be reviewed by the Director of Accreditation & Assessment, and the Vice President for Enrollment Management. A substantive change impacting more than 25% (by the number of credits) of the entire curriculum must be reported to WASC and may require additional filing. A substantive change in a program may require to go through the new program approval process, including reviews and recommendations by Senate Executive Board and Faculty Senate and approval by Board of Trustees.

Simple revisions include changes only in the following:

• change in program description,
• changes in electives only, or changes in less than 25% (by the number of credits) of core courses with no substantive structure change to the core curriculum,
• change in degree catalog information, including admission information, grade requirements, course sequencing, suggested plans for degree completion,
• minor changes in program requirements that do not lower the requirement below the university-wide standard.

Proposals for simple revisions in existing programs are routinely reviewed by the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education for clarity and to ensure that academic policies are followed. The academic unit of the program makes actual approval of the simple revision proposals.

The Revision Process

Proposals for revising existing programs may originate with faculty or administrators.

If there are questions about whether a revision is simple or complex, please consult the Associate Vice President for Graduate EducationGradEd@chapman.edu. The program/department should notify Associate Vice President for Graduate Education by October 15, 2025, of plans to submit the revision proposal and provide a short description of the changes. The Associate Vice President for Graduate Education will assess the changes and notify the program/department if additional consultations are necessary.

Any question as to whether a program revision is a substantive change should be brought to the Director of Accreditation and Assessment for review by either the originator of the proposal or the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education providing a preliminary review of the proposal. The originator must work with the Director for Accreditation and Assessment for programs with substantive changes on appropriate submissions to WASC.

Proposals are submitted by the originator through the Curriculog proposal system, choosing one of the forms:

• 2025-2026 Grad Complex Revisions to Existing Degrees and Programs
• 2025-2026 Grad Simple Revisions to Existing Degrees and Programs

Submitting the proposals before the deadlines is encouraged, particularly for complex changes. The individuals providing documentation of consultation or recommendations on approval are notified through the Curriculogprocess, and comments be sent to the originators and others in the approval process through that system.

Proposals for all program revisions must include the following:

• Rationale for the proposed changes
• Discussion of the impact on schedules, space and funding, and faculty allocations because of this revision
• Discussion explaining changes (if any) to:
  • the PLO curricular map,
  • learning outcomes assessment, and,
  • Attachments are required for new learning outcomes, PLO maps, and Learning Outcomes Assessment plan changes.

(Note that these items are required for all complex changes)

Complex Revisions:

Complex change proposals require consultations that should be completed by November 15:

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education for review regarding policy and procedure compliance of program revisions and to determine if any additional consultations are necessary.
• Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness, Faculty Affairs and Accreditation and/or Director of Accreditation and Assessment to consult on matters pertaining to potential WASC “substantive change” requirements and on matters about program learning outcomes and assessment
• Vice President of Enrollment Management of any complex program revisions to notify of any changes that might affect recruitment and enrollment.

Following the above consultation and proposal submission to the Curriculog, the proposal is reviewed by:

• Representative of program/department faculty
• Academic Unit Curriculum Committee
• Dean

These parties will provide recommendations on approval within 15 calendar days of the proposal submission, but not later than November 30, 2025. The recommendations on approval may include memoranda from the program/department faculty, curriculum committee, and/or dean, clarifying the reason for their position on approval.

Following the academic unit recommendations and no later than December 1, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education advances the proposal to the GAC, which reviews and approves complex revisions to existing programs that do not involve accreditation changes.

Complex revisions that have implications for WASC accreditation must go through the same approval process as new program proposals, including review and recommendations from GAC, LRPC, Senate Executive Board, and Faculty Senate and approval by the Board of Trustees.

Simple Revisions:

Simple revision change proposals are to be filed no later than December 1 to be reviewed by the following:

• Representative of program/department faculty
• Academic Unit Curriculum Committee
• Dean

These parties will submit a recommendation on approval within one week (7 days) after submission of the proposal to Curriculog, but not later than December 7, 2025. The recommendations on approval may include memoranda from the program/department faculty, curriculum committee, and/or dean stating the reason for their position on approval.

Following the academic unit recommendations, the proposal advances to the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education for review regarding policy and procedure compliance of program revisions. If the academic unit approval recommendations are unanimous, final approval is given by the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education. If the academic unit approval recommendations are not unanimous, the proposal will be forwarded to GAC for review and approval.

Closing a Program Process 2025-2026.pdf

The closure of a program does not happen often. It is recommended that a program/department or academic unit work closely with the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education to ensure that all steps are followed and documented. Use the forms provided in the Appendix-Formsfor each type of program closure to document the process.

WASC Policy for Program Closure Teach-out Plans

Chapman University adheres to the WASC policy for program closures in case of program discontinuance. The home department must make best efforts to ensure that all matriculated students have a pathway to graduation. Details and templates can be found in the WASC Teach-Out Plans and Agreements Guide.

Closure of an Existing Degree Program

The closure of an existing degree program is a serious matter that requires careful deliberation, informed by the alignment of resource allocations with the Chapman Strategic Plan’s stated goals and aims and those of the university.

Closure may be prompted by

• the program review process
• a change in University or academic unit goals and operations
• an issue tied to accreditation
• a significant change in enrollment or enrollment prospects
• a significant change in the program/department faculty needed to provide the program or
• another situation that may arise.

In some cases, the decision to recommend program closure is unanimous on the part of the provost, dean, and program/department unit faculty. In other situations, there may not be a unanimous decision from all parties concerned or affected by the closure and/or members of the university at large.

A pending decision to close a program creates potential problems for current applicants. A decision to halt applications or suspend admissions should be taken in consultation with the

• Provost
• Office of Admissions
• Director of Accreditation and Assessment
• Program/department faculty
• Dean

Such consultation should happen immediately upon consideration of program closure so that appropriate action can be taken as quickly as possible to provide the least disruption to the current program applicants and students.

The information regarding the Proposal to Close Program and all comments made should be available to the parties engaged in the decision-making process. The process should be straightforward and allow for faculty consultation. All information for the specific proposal must be placed in the file sharing folder created by the Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education. Contact Lonnise Magallanez at GradEd@chapman.edu to establish the folder for the proposal and the review documents. Links to the folder can then be shared with all parties who need access for the comments and review.

The process below addresses two situations:

Alternative 1 - is the pathway if there is full agreement on a recommendation to close a program between involved parties in the academic unit and the provost.

Alternative 2 - provides a pathway if concerns or disagreements about the recommendation to close the program are expressed by parties in the academic unit and/or others in the University and documented during the process.

Closure process in detail

A proposal to terminate an existing program or degree may originate from the

• Provost
• Dean
• Program/department faculty

Step 1: No matter where the proposal originates, the originator drafts a Preliminary Rationale to Close Degree Program and is immediately provided to the program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committee, dean, and provost for discussion and consideration.

The Office of Admissions, the Vice President of Institutional Effectiveness and Faculty Advancement, and the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education are notified of the proposed closure and consulted in the preparation of the Preliminary Rationale for Program Closure so that they may provide the originator with information about the closure process and potential issues that should be addressed in the Preliminary Rationale.

The following parties should be notified in writing of the Preliminary Rationale for informational purposes and to assist as needed in preparation for the Proposal to Close Degree Program:

• Enrollment Services/Registrar
• Strategic Marketing & Communication
• Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education (Closure of an Integrated Program)
• EVP/COO (if the proposal is an international or joint program with another school)
• Legal Affairs (if the proposal is an international or joint program with another school)

This Preliminary Rationale to Close Degree Program must include:

• An explanation of the reasoning or situation that has initiated the proposal to close the program
• A brief impact analysis of the effect of the proposed closure, including:
  • Expected impact on current students
  • Expected impact on current applicants
  • Accreditation issues that will arise from program closure
  • Expected impact on all faculty, with specific attention to how current tenured faculty will be affected
• Preliminary plans to address each of the situations above
• Discussion of economic factors that either are a part of the decision for closure or will be created by the program closure
• Discussion of how closure aligns with the university's strategic plan
• A clear timeline for program closure addressing deadlines for each step in the process, including any steps that need to be immediately taken depending on when the closure process is initiated, such as suspension of the admission process.
• In a situation in which the timeline for the decision on closure needs to be expedited for a legitimate and agreed-upon reason, the proposer may ask the program/department faculty, curriculum committee, councils, and SEB to reduce the timeline for the process as much as possible and still allow enough time for faculty consultation.

No form is provided to prepare the Preliminary Rationale to Close Program, however, the proposer should follow the outline above.

Step 2: A meeting is called by the proposal originator with program/department faculty, the academic unit curriculum committee, the dean, and the provost to allow for open discussion by these parties regarding the Preliminary Rationale. Questions, concerns, objections to, and support for the closure of the program should be brought to this discussion and recorded so that information will be available in the Proposal to Close Degree Program. At this meeting, a timeline is established for the development of the Proposal to Close the Degree Program and to collect the response to the proposal from the program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committee, and dean. (Note: this is not an open meeting. The meeting is designed to facilitate the process and provide important information in the Proposal).

Step 3: Following the Preliminary Rationale meeting, if the proposal originator wishes to continue with the closure proposal, a complete Proposal to Close Degree Program is prepared and submitted to the program/department faculty, academic curriculum committee, and dean. This full proposal becomes the primary document reviewed by members of the academic unit and all subsequent reviewers. The Proposal to Close Degree Program (form can be found in the Appendix-Forms found at the end of this Handbook) must contain, at a minimum, all the information listed in the form.

Step 4: Upon receipt of the full Proposal to Degree Close Program, and within the time agreed upon in Step 2, but not less than 30 calendar days, the program/department faculty, the curriculum committee, and the dean provide a written response to the proposal with a recommendation for or against closing the program. It is recommended that each party provide a rationale for the recommendation.

Any party may request information from students and alumni and incorporate it into the recommendation. If such parties have a strong opinion on the proposed closure, it is recommended that parties with a stake in the decision be provided an avenue to express their concerns, whether in a public meeting or in writing. All such concerns should be documented with the Proposal to Close Degree Program. At the end of step 4, all recommendations and other documents created are collected and posted. While it is recommended that the program/department faculty and college/school curriculum committee each provide a separate group response, any individual in the academic unit may submit a separate individual response to the recommendation for approval/non-approval of the Proposal to Close Degree Program.

Step 5: All recommendations and other documents created in Step 4 are available for review by the program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committee, dean, and the originator (if outside the academic unit) during the subsequent one week (7 calendar days) or within the time agreed upon in Step 2. Comments and responses may be posted and should be limited primarily to omissions or corrections to statements of fact.

ALTERNATIVE ONE

If at the end of the academic unit review period (Steps 4-5), all of the recommendations and comments from the program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committee, and dean are unanimously in support of closure:

Step 6/Alternative 1: the recommendations and proposal are sent to the GAC (and UAC, if necessary) and LRPC. GAC (and UAC, if necessary) review the proposal to ensure the closure process meets all academic policies and procedures, does not have an undue impact on other programs, and provides for a reasonable teach-out plan for the current students. LRPC reviews the long-range impact of the closure. Comments from the Councils are then sent to the SEB.

Step 7/Alternative 1: The SEB reviews the Proposal and all recommendations for adherence to process and policy. Should there be no issues, the Proposal and all recommendations are sent to the Provost for final action. Should any issues arise, the SEB places the Proposal to Close Program on the Senate agenda for review and recommendation (see Step 8 / Alternative 2).

ALTERNATIVE TWO

If the recommendations from the program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committee, and dean are not unanimous:

Step 6/Alternative 2: the Proposal to Close a Degree Program, recommendations, and other comments are forwarded concurrently to the GAC (and UAC, if necessary), LRPC, and SEB for review and recommendation. The SEB is placing the Proposal to Close Degree Program on the Faculty Senate agenda. The second Senate reading is scheduled to occur after the senators receive information from the councils and SEB.

Step 7/Alternative 2: The GAC/UAC, LRPC, and SEB review the Proposal to Close DegreeProgram, all recommendations and comments, and any other information obtained in the process. Based on the information provided, each council and the SEB make a recommendation for approval.

Step 8/Alternative 2: The SEB provides the Faculty Senate with the Proposal to Close Degree Program and all recommendations and comments to date. The Faculty Senate votes to recommend or not recommend closure, and the result is sent to the Provost for action.

Final Decision: The Provost has final authority to decide whether to approve or not approve the program closure.

Upon determination by the Provost to close or not to close a program, notification of the decision is sent by the Office of the Provost to:

• President, Faculty Senate
• Dean, academic unit curriculum committee, and program/department faculty
• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education
• Vice President of Institutional Effectiveness and Faculty Advancement, and the Director of Accreditation & Assessment, who will notify WASC of the closure
• Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education (for an Integrated Program only)
• Office of Enrollment Management Services and Admissions Office
• Enrollment Services/Registrar (upon approval only)
• Strategic Marketing & Communication (upon approval only)
• EVP/COO (upon approval only)
• Legal Affairs (upon approval only)
• Board of Trustees (upon approval only)

Process following approval of closure:

The following communication is required once the degree program closure is approved:

1. An official notice of program closure to all active and inactive students, including the following details of the program closure:
   1. A timeline for the closure: we have not accepted any students for fall and are no longer accepting applications for future terms.
   2. A timeline and a specific course plan will be provided to help students complete their program in a timely way, including what courses will be offered and in which terms so that the students can appropriately plan for the completion of their degrees.
   3. Notice to offer advising sessions to any student who has questions or concerns about their ability to finish within the provided timeframe with the assurance that the program will do its best to help every student finish.
   4. If a student cannot finish within that time frame, the program will do its best to help them finish at another program/institution.
   5. The tuition and fees and pricing structure for the remaining terms.
2. An official notice of program closure to all faculty and staff in the program.
3. An update of the program website with program closure information.

Closing a Graduate Emphasis or Credential, or Certificate for Academic Credit 2025-2026.pdf

The faculty body is responsible for maintaining the integrity of academic offerings in the catalog. The academic integrity of the catalog is undermined when emphases, and courses listed in the catalog are not offered on a regular basis. If a graduate emphasis or credential, or certificate for academic credit has had no students for three years or more, the program/department faculty must make a case for its continuation or the Graduate Academic Council may recommend its elimination in the program review process.

The Faculty Senate recommends to all academic units and programs/departments that they drop from the catalog any emphases, credentials, or other programs in which core courses have not been offered and taught with the minimum enrollment requirement within the last four years as established by the Provost.

The closure of a Certificate for Academic Credit program must be reported to WASC. Please notify the Director of Accreditation & Assessment of a certificate program closure to ensure all required steps are taken and reports are made.

Process for Closing a Graduate Emphasis or Credential in a Program or a Certificate for Academic Credit Program

A proposal to terminate a Graduate Emphasis, or Credential, or Certificate for Academic Credit may originate with an academic unit, dean, the Provost, or the GAC.

The proposal for closing a graduate emphasis or credential in a program; or academic certificate program must be submitted to the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, accompanied by the Closing an Emphasis, Credential, or Certificate for Academic Credit Program Form, which can be found in the Appendix-Forms at the end of this Handbook. Closure of an emphasis or credential in a program, or academic certificate for credit program can take place at any time, but to be removed from the following year's academic catalog the proposal must be submitted by December 1, 2025.

A proposal to close a graduate emphasis or credential in a program or a certificate program should present a written explanation of the reasons for closing it and include all information required in the form.

A rationale for the proposed closure is reviewed, and a recommendation on approval is made by the:

• Dean. Written response sent to the academic unit curriculum committee.
• Academic unit curriculum committee. Written response sent to the program/department faculty.
• Program/department faculty.

Each party listed above may provide a position memorandum on their decision.

• The proposal originator must notify the Vice President for Enrollment Management, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, and the Director of Accreditation & Assessment of the proposed change.

Proposals with optional written responses are sent to the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, who forwards the proposals to the Chair of GAC.

The GAC reviews the proposal and provides recommendations. If the closure impacts the program budget and/or faculty teaching, the proposal is sent to LRPC for review and recommendation. The Provost makes the final decision on the closure after reviewing the proposal and obtaining recommendations from GAC and LRPC (if appropriate).

New Courses Process 2025-2026.pdf

New Course Proposal forms may be submitted anytime during the academic year. The proposal originator should indicate the first term the course will be offered, which cannot be the current term and cannot start in less than 3 months. After all approvals are received, new courses are entered into the course master by the Office of the Registrar, and then they become active. Once active, a course may be offered. New course listings and descriptions will appear in the following year’s catalog.  

The approval of New Course Proposal forms is the responsibility of the faculty of each respective academic unit. A faculty member who develops a course prepares all required information for a New Course Proposal form in Curriculog. The Curriculogform can be completed by a faculty, program staff, or an administrative assistant.  

New Course Proposal approval workflow in Curriculogis as follows:  

• The Originator  

• Academic unit’s designated approver  

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education  

• Vice Provost for Operations and Finance  

• • Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit

Changes to Existing Courses Process 2025-2026.pdf

All changes to existing course (including changes in course description, title, grade option, prerequisites, fees, faculty load, number of credits, course component, etc.) will be submitted through a Modify Course form in Curriculog. Course changes must be submitted by March 15 to be included in the following year’s catalog.  

When revising a course, it is crucial to pay attention to the Impact Statement, which is a part ofthe Curriculoginput process. If a course being revised is used in any other program, it is theresponsibility of the program changing the course to notify the other impacted programs.  

Modify course form workflow approvals in Curriculog:  

• The Originator  

• The program/department curriculum committee  

• Academic unit’s designated approver  

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education   

• Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit   

After approval of the proposal, a change of an existing course will be updated in the University catalog. The course criteria remain on students’ academic records according to the catalog year when the course was taken. Previous course forms remain as a record in Curriculog.   

Inactivating Courses Process 2025-2026.pdf

Academic units may submit an Inactivate Course Proposal Form in Curriculog. Inactivate Course Proposals must be submitted by March 15to be removed from the following year’s catalog.  

When inactivating a course, it is crucial to pay attention to the Impact Statement, which is a partof the Curriculogprocess. If a course being inactivated is used in any other program, it is theresponsibility of the program inactivating the course to notify the other impacted programs.Academic units should also consult with any programs/departments whose degree requirementsare affected by the proposed course deletions.   

After approval, an inactive course will be removed from the University catalog. The course will remain on students’ academic records and as a record in Curriculogand the Office of the University Registrar.   

Inactivate course proposal form approval workflow in Curriculog:  

• The Originator  

• Academic unit’s designated approver  

• Associate Vice President for Graduate Education   

• Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit   

Academic units should monitor their curriculum to avoid a proliferation of courses without regard to their utilization. Courses that are no longer an essential part of the curriculum should be considered for inactivation. A course should be inactivated for the following reasons:  

• The course number has been changed.  

• The course will no longer be offered.  

• The entire content of the course has changed.  

• The course has not been taught for four (4) years or more.   

Note: The Office of Associate Vice President for Graduate Education will notify units about courses not taught in the past four (4) years that must be removed from the subsequent catalog. These courses must be made inactive or a rationale for keeping the course active in the catalog must be provided.   

Cross-Listed Courses Process 2025-2026.pdf  

1.General  

The request for cross-listing should be submitted as a course modification (or a new course) in Curriculog (see Requirements below) with the exception of Experimental courses (see Crosslisting of experimental courses).   

The authority to approve or deny the cross-listing requests lies with the Graduate Academic Council. The Graduate Academic Council may choose to delegate approval authority to the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education.  

2. Requests for Cross-listing: 

2.1.Between graduate courses  

• Cross-listed graduate courses must have the rigor, expectations, content, and methodologies that are appropriate for the courses respective levels of credit and discipline(s). The Curriculum Committee of a particular academic unit may be charged with determining the appropriateness of cross-listing courses by subject area(s).   

• Academic units may seek approval for cross-listing under certain circumstances. Specifically, the Graduate Academic Council may support the cross-listing of interdisciplinary or multi-disciplinary courses across academic units and departments, providing that the criteria listed below are met. In general, to be considered by GAC for cross-listing, a course must:  

• Demonstrate consistent occurrence of topics from more than one discipline.  

• Demonstrate using primary and/or secondary sources from multiple disciplines.   

• Demonstrate the use of methodologies from more than one discipline if the methodologies are different.  

• Encourage students to think critically regarding the relationship among the disciplines, their subject matter, and methodologies.  

• Courses should not be cross-listed for the sole purpose of increasing potential enrollments.  

2.2.Between graduate and undergraduate courses  

• The Graduate Academic Council generally discourages cross-listing between graduate and undergraduate courses. Exceptions can be made for cross-listing:  

• 500-level graduate courses with 400-level undergraduate courses.  

• 500-level graduate travel courses with 300-level undergraduate travel courses.  

A justification with a clear basis for cross-listing, such as an external accreditation requirement and/or major academic reason, must be presented.   

• The Graduate Academic Council will not consider cross-listing of:   

• graduate courses higher than 500-level with undergraduate courses.   

• a graduate course with undergraduate course below 400-level (with the exception of 300-level travel courses).   

2.3.Experimental courses  

• A temporary (one term only) cross-listing of experimental courses is allowed with the restrictions outlined above.   

• A temporary (one term only) cross-listing of experimental courses does not require approval of Graduate Academic Council or Associate Vice President for Graduate Education.   

• Cross-listing of experimental courses outside of the restrictions outlined in this Handbook or for the period longer than one term or repeated requests for cross-listing for one term requires approval as described above.   

3.Requirements  

Faculty or administrators wishing to cross-list courses in different graduate programs must submit a New or Modify Course Proposal form in Curriculog with the following documentation:   

• Request for Cross-listed Course Form, which can be found through the link provided in the Appendix-Forms at the end of this Handbook. The Form should include full names of the programs and must be signed by the relevant program approvers.  

• Detailed rationale for cross-listing. Relevant program approvers must indicate their approval of the course and their agreement that the course is multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary in nature or provide a rationale if another type of cross-listing is requested.   

• Course syllabus. For cross-listing of graduate and undergraduate courses the expectations and requirements must be explicitly distinguished. The requirements for graduate students must be commensurate with other graduate coursework in the field, including additional assignments and a comprehensive evaluation process based on graduate-level performance expectations.  

• Cross-listed courses must have the same course description, course learning outcomes, syllabus, and other appropriate information. The originators need to make required changes on course proposal forms and submit them in Curriculog to align the criteria of cross-listed courses.  

4.Cross-listed courses  

• Cross-listing of Graduate courses: if approved for cross-listing, the cross-listed graduate courses must use the same course number in each of the academic units in which they are listed. After completing the course, students who have enrolled in a course under one program/department code may not change and may not petition the change of the offering program/department name.   

• Cross-listed courses are considered equivalent courses for students. Thus, students should not repeat the same course cross-listed in another discipline/program.   

• If two courses are cross-listed, the enrollments are allocated to the home department/academic unit, regardless of who is teaching the course and regardless of whether the students are enrolled under a specific code. The home department is designated in the initial request for cross-listing. The home department/academic unit is responsible for scheduling of the cross-listed course; the “primary” section of the course is assigned to the home department/academic unit.   

• The revenues are allocated to the department/academic unit of the faculty member teaching the course.  

• A note on cross-listing and interdisciplinary programs: A program that includes courses from more than one department/academic unit should list all of the approved courses by subject code of the academic unit offering the course under the program’s catalog description and with the Office of the University Registrar’s degree audit program. Programs should only cross-list individual courses that are themselves inherently inter- or multidisciplinary, not the entire array of courses within the program.  

General Instructions

The deadlines for proposals and other changes in the catalog and the proposal submission information are given in the calendar section at the beginning of this Handbook.

The graduate catalog applies to students matriculating that catalog year and thereafter.

All catalog materials should be reviewed at least annually by academic units and program departments to remove inconsistencies and errors and further accuracy, clarity and uniformity. If an update is required, submit a corresponding proposal form in Curriculog.

Academic units are encouraged to take a hard look at programs, degrees, emphases, and courses that are unrealistic regarding faculty resources or student demand. Thorough self-appraisal is asked of all course-offering units. Program changes and course changes should be submitted as needed to initiate these catalog changes.

The proposal originator should monitor the approval process of the program revisions and all course proposals to ensure timely processing at the academic unit level.

• The academic unit should provide the information to GradEd@chapman.edu about all changes in the list of their designated approvers before August 1, 2025. If any changes in the list of approvers are required after this date, the academic unit should immediately notify the Associate Registrar.
• Any course proposal not approved by the Academic Unit's Graduate Course Approver within a week after the proposal submission deadline may not be included in the new catalog.
• Any program revision proposals not approved at the Academic Unit's level within two weeks after the proposal submission deadline may not be included in the new catalog.

New programs, revisions, and/or closing of programs

• All program proposals must follow the Curriculum Process for Programsand the appropriate calendar deadlinesfor filing.
• Any new program not approved by all appropriate approvers, as specified below, will not be included in the catalog.
• All new program proposals require documented consultation with all relevant offices and administrators prior to being submitted to the GAC, so it is required that the consultation process begin earlier, at least two months before the submission deadline.
• Course numbers and titles for the courses listed in the degree requirements section of the program form should be identical to those approved in Curriculogfor the upcoming year.

New, revised, or inactivated courses

• All course changes are made through the Curriculum Process for Courses,and changes must adhere to course proposal deadlinesfor inclusion in the catalog for the following academic year.
• Course description information submitted to the Curriculog with the proposal is imported directly to the Catalog. Please make sure that the course description is accurate and satisfies the requirements listed in the Curriculog form.
• When making changes to courses, be sure to review the impact such changes will have on programs in which those courses are included.

The following should be done annually to ensure accuracy in Catalog course listings:

• The course numbers, titles, and descriptions in the catalog and class schedules reflect the course numbers, titles, and descriptions stated in the most recent forms submitted through Curriculog.
• The inclusion of new courses and the removal of courses that have been inactivated.
• Courses not offered for three or more years and not scheduled for the upcoming year should be made inactive and removed from the catalog. Inactivate the course proposal form in Curriculog.
• Course offering frequency, as listed in the catalog, should correspond with the program’s proposed study plan and course offering schedule. Modify the existing course proposal form in Curriculog.

Revisions in college/school or department descriptions

Each unit is responsible for updating college/school or department description narratives. A copy of the previous year’s description with the highlighted changes for the new catalog should be provided to the Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit, Stephen Hall,by the stated deadline.

All catalog materials will be reviewed by the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education and the Associate Registrar for Catalogs & Degree Audit prior to publication in the interest of removing inconsistencies and errors and furthering accuracy, clarity, and uniformity in presenting university information to the public.

See the Graduate Academic Councils Calendar: 2025-2026 for more detailed information and the deadlines.

The selection of the appropriate CIP code for a new program or the changing of a CIP code for an existing program must be done in consultation with the Director of Accreditation & Assessment and the Office of the University Registrar. The number must be included in all new program proposals. Changing a CIP code for an existing program also requires consultation with the Director of Accreditation & Assessment and the Office of the University Registrar. A request to change a CIP Code is considered a complex program revision and should follow the complex revision process.

The Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) provides a taxonomic scheme that supports the accurate tracking and reporting of fields of study and program completion activity. CIP was originally developed by the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in 1980 and revised several times thereafter.

The CIP titles and program descriptions are intended to be generic categories into which program completion data can be placed, not exact duplicates of a specific major or field of study titles used by individual institutions. CIP codes are standard statistical coding tools that reflect current practice and are not a prescriptive list of officially recognized or permitted programs. The CIP is not intended to be a regulatory device. For the most part, CIP codes are not intended to correspond exclusively to any specific degree or program level. In most cases, any given instructional program may be offered at various levels, and CIP codes are intended to capture all such data.

Most CIP titles correspond to academic and occupational instructional programs offered for credit at the postsecondary level. These programs result in recognized completion points and awards, including degrees, certificates, and other formal awards. The CIP also includes other instructional programs, such as residency programs in various dental, medical, podiatric, and veterinary specialties that may lead to advanced professional certification, personal improvement, and leisure programs; and instructional programs that lead to diplomas and certificates at the secondary level only.

The CIP is the accepted federal government statistical standard on instructional program classifications and is used in various education information surveys and databases. Since it was first published in 1980, the CIP has been used by NCES in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and its predecessor, the Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), to code degree completions. It is also used by other Department of Education offices, such as the Office for Civil Rights, the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, and the Office of Special Education, and serves as the standard on instructional programs for other federal agencies, including the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Commerce (Bureau of the Census), the Department of Labor (Bureau of Labor Statistics), and others. The CIP is used by state agencies, national associations, academic institutions, and employment counseling services to collect, report, and analyze instructional program data.

Detailed information on CIP codes can be found at the National Center for Educational Statistics website on CIP Codes. Information on the current CIP code for a Chapman academic program can be obtained from the Office of the University Registrar.

• 001–099: Remedial courses and courses are not appropriate for college degree credit, however, are designed to meet the specific needs of individuals or groups where degree credit is not required. Remedial courses are non–credit courses.
• 100–499: Undergraduate courses. See details in the Undergraduate Curriculum Handbook and the Undergraduate Catalog.
• 500–699: Graduate courses for graduate students and, by permission, for senior undergraduate students meeting specific guidelines.
• 700–799: Post-master’s and doctoral courses.

Special Courses

The course numbers listed below are reserved for the accompanying subjects:

• 529/629/729 Experimental courses
• 590/690/790 Independent internship
• 599/699/799 Individual study
• 698 Master’s Thesis/continuous enrollment
• 798 Doctoral Dissertation/continuous enrollment

All Chapman University courses are offered on the basis of credit hours or credits. One credit hour of coursework requires one face-to-face contact hour (one contact hour = 50 minutes) per week between an instructor and a student and two hours of assigned coursework per week on the part of the student outside of the classroom for a regular term (15 weeks including the final exam period). Some classes meet beyond the scheduled class times based on the credits listed. The number of contact hours and assigned coursework in lab courses, research courses, self-directed courses, non-traditional media-based courses, and travel courses are tailored to the type of course and/or course objectives.

Lab courses have a strong skill component and typically require a special room, equipment, or fieldwork experience for students to utilize to enhance their learning. One credit of a lab course requires a minimum of three contact hours, which may include:

• A minimum of three hours of face-to-face contact hour per week between an instructor, and a student OR
• A combination of face-to-face contact hours and assigned coursework will result in a total of three contact hours of engagement per week of instruction for a regular term.

Individuallydirected courses provide a more in-depth interaction between student, faculty member and course materials or research project. Since, typically, a student works one-on-one with a faculty member and receives an intensified experience of personalized education, the contact hours and amount of assigned coursework are tailored to the nature of the coursework and may exceed the minimum requirements given below.

Reading and Conference, Individual Study and Research, and Thesis courses require a minimum of five hours of instructor-student contact per credit hour and a minimum of 30 hours of outside work per credit hour per term.

Travel courses are measured in weeks, with each week garnering a maximum of one credit. Travel courses require a minimum of 15 hours of contact and 30 hours of assigned coursework or experience per credit hour. For courses with two weeks of travel, additional 15 contact hours are required before and/or after travel.

Nontraditional Courses (Distance Education Courses) follow the same contact-hour and assigned coursework requirements as the regular in-person courses.

Courses Governed by Accrediting Agencies

Accrediting agencies may require different standards for specific courses in the accredited programs. If the agency’s requirements are different from the University’s requirements or policies, the programs should follow the agency’s requirements and add a note explaining the differences in all forms for a new course or modification of a course.

Overview

The curriculum process consists of two types of curriculum proposals:

• Program proposals for new programs, revisions of existing programs, and closing of programs.
• Course proposals for new courses, changes to existing courses, and inactivation of courses.

The terms “program”, “academic unit,” “program department,” “program department faculty,” “program department faculty representative,” and “academic unit curriculum committee” are used as defined in the Definition of Termssection at the beginning of this Handbook.

A list of all graduate academic programs can be found in the graduate catalog.

Graduate Academic Council Calendar 2025-2026,at the beginning of this document, defines submission deadlines for all types of program and course proposals.

Consultations

Academic units and program/department faculty preparing curricular proposals are responsible for consultation with other academic programs/departments whose academic programs and courses may be impacted by the curricular proposal being submitted.

Consultations are also required with appropriate administrative units to discuss the impact of the proposed changes and ensure that all policies and procedures are followed. The required consultations are listed for every type of proposal in the sections below.

All such consultations must be documented. GAC will not review the proposals that do not document the required consultation process.

The consultation process must be completed for any of the following proposals:

• New program proposal
• Program complex revision
• Program closure

The following actions, even if they do not require any of the proposal types listed above, also require consultations:

• Addition to and/or deletion from the program curriculum of a course that is offered in another program or by another academic unit/department*
• Deletion of and/or changes to a course, which is also used another program*
• Addition of a new course that may converge with the curricular offerings of another program/department

*The Curriculogcourse proposal system provides for and requires that an impact statement be run on revised and inactivated courses. The course proposal initiator is responsible for notifying other impacted programs of the change to or inactivation of a course. Notifications and consultations must be made in advance so that the impacted programs have time to reflect the changes in their curricula.

The programs and units are welcome to request a consultation with Graduate Education or other University offices if necessary.

Observing Deadlines

All participants in the curriculum process need sufficient time to plan, consult, and finish their work so that the implementation of programs will not be delayed and essential information will be available in the catalog when students need it.

Programs/departments, academic units, and other consultative bodies must adhere to the stated deadlines on the Graduate Academic Council Calendar 2025-2026 contained in this document.

• Proposals that require consultation should be provided to those offices, which should be consulted for a minimum of two weeks for review and an opportunity to provide comments before submitting the finalized proposal to the academic units, curriculum committees, and deans.
• Academic units, curriculum committees, and deans need sufficient time to review the proposals. Proposal originators should schedule the review process within their academic unit and program/department in advance to provide sufficient time to those reviewers adhering to the deadlines for submission of the final proposals to the university for review.

If deadlines are missed, proposals may not be reviewed in time to be included in the catalog.

Administrative Offices need accurate and up-to-date information provided by timely consultation and review so that the following can be accomplished:

• The Graduate Admission Office must inform prospective students of program changes.
• The Office of the University Registrar has to verify and evaluate student records to ensure timely graduation.
• Reviews of the new degree programs must be added to the Faculty Senate and Board of Trustee calendars to move forward in a timely way.
• Finally, the university catalogsmust be published and delivered on schedule.

Budgetary and Resource Considerations

Curricular changes may incur both costs and benefits, whether involving an addition, deletion, or modification of programs or courses. All curricular changes need to be analyzed in terms of their impact on resources, including FTE generation by/in the academic unit and by other programs that these changes may impact.

Changes that reduce FTE generation or require new resources must be carefully justified. Any net gain or loss in academic units or courses is subject to monitoring by the Office of the Provost, in consultation with the academic deans.

Academic units are strongly recommended to avoid a proliferation of courses without regard to their utility and fit within the program. Academic units must be mindful of resource implications and balance between additions and deletions of courses.

Each academic unit determines its approval process for course proposals prior to the point of proposal submission in Curriculog. Each year the Associate Registrar performs the Catalog and Degree Audit and requests an update of course approvers in each program/department and for each subject code/program so that the appropriate individuals are contacted during the proposal review process. Any changes to the persons holding that roles need to be timely communicated to the Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit.

The Graduate Academic Council reviews all course syllabi only when submitted in new program proposals or if the course is part of a complex change in a program. GAC does not review new or revised course proposals.

Overview

The curriculum process for courses requires submission of course proposals to Curriculog using one of the following forms:

• New Course Proposal
• Change in Existing Course Proposal
• Inactivate Course Proposal

These course proposals may also include requests for:

• Travel Course
• Cross-listed Course

The course proposal process and workflow are as follows:

• Course proposals are submitted using Curriculog. The submission process includes cross- check the proposal for completion and correctness.
• Curriculogforwards each course proposal to the designated approvers according to the set workflow.

Guidelines for the Various Criteria Required for Course Proposals in Curriculog

Curriculog (https://chapman.curriculog.com/) is an online curriculum management system that collects new, revised, or inactivated course information and provides an environment for proposal review and comments request approvals from the appropriate individuals in a defined workflow. The information Curriculog collects and provides to the Registrar’s office is used directly in the Graduate course catalog. The information following will also be transferred to next year’s graduate course catalog.

Questions regarding Curriculog course proposals or requests for training should be sent to Associate Registrar, Catalog & Degree Audit, Stephen Hall.

Below is a list of information required to be input into the Curriculogcourse approval system*.

Impact report(only in a modify or inactivate course form)

Has this update been approved by the Curriculum Committee of the School?(only in a modify course form; the approval must be completed prior to the launch of the proposal form)

Respond as appropriate

First term to be offered(or first term impacted)

Fill in the term as appropriate.

Course status

• "Active-Visible" - for all courses that will appear in the catalog.
• "Inactive-Hidden" – for Inactivated courses

Faculty members

Fill in name(s) as appropriate.

Academic unit approver

Select from the dropdown menu. (Choose the academic unit required for this course approval.)

Acalog hierarchy

Subject code description*

Select from dropdown menu. (Example: the subject code description is English; the subject code is ENG.)

Subject code*

Select from drop down menu.

Course number*

* Please do NOT change the Subject Code Description, Subject Code, or Course Number in the Modify course form. If you wish to change any of these fields, submit a New course proposal form.

Course title (no abbreviations)

Fill in the title or revise it as determined.

Course Description

A course description as it will appear in the catalog

In writing the course description, please follow the guidelines below:

• A description should describe the course goals and material to be covered. The style of the description should conform to the following:
• Use nouns and verbs and complete sentences.
• Use active verbs.
• Write in the third person and do not change.
• Avoid using a series of questions to introduce the course descriptions.
• While there is no word count limit, please keep the course description brief and to the point.
• All course descriptions will be listed in one paragraph in the catalog. Additional paragraphs, or bullets/numbering will be combined into one paragraph.
• For questions on style, please consult the Chapman University Communications StyleGuide.
• The course description must include language addressing teaching methodology if a course or some sections of a course include distance education components. Permission to use the distance learning modality should be obtained before submitting the course proposal form. Please contact Melissa Samaniego, Assistant Director of Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.
• If appropriate and approved by program/department faculty, the description may include a “combined course” statement, such as “Some sections of XXX 500 are held with YYY 500”. This is not the cross-listing.
• Descriptions must be given not only for new or revised courses, but also for specific topics or seminar courses that are offered under generic syllabi.

Credit(s)

Prerequisite(s) and Restrictions

• If Prerequisite courses are required, list them using the following format: the word Prerequisite(s), subject code, and course number, e.g., "Prerequisite, XXX500"
• If Instructor Consent is required: "instructor consent required"
• If there are any Degree(s) Restrictions: i.e., "film studies only"
• List any additional restrictions, e.g., "advancement to candidacy" or "this course may not be taken concurrently with...". .

In cases when a graduate course does not carry course prerequisites, other non-course prerequisites must be specified, indicating the appropriate academic maturity required for a student to take the course. Also include all other restrictions on an academic level required.

Corequisite Courses

List any course that must be taken at the same time as the course.

Grading basis

Grading options to select from the drop-down menu include:

• Letter Grade.
• Numerical grading.
• Pass/No Pass. (Note: Pass/No Pass requires a C+ to pass unless otherwise stated in a program section of the catalog.)

Repeatability

• Repeatable for credit if the topic is different.
• This course may be repeated for credit.
• With consent, this course may be repeated for credit.

If repeatable, enter the total credits allowed

Enter the total limit on the credits a student can earn in the course. If there is no limit, leave the field empty.

Course Fee Information

Minimum allowable fee is $75. Input the fee amount and include a fee justification.

Course Learning Outcomes

Specify the intended learning outcomes of the course. The outcomes are brief statements of student abilities or behaviors that can be observed or demonstrated as a result of the course.

Program Learning Outcomes

This section should specify the learning outcomes for the degree program that the course supports and, if not apparent, describe how course outcomes support the program outcomes.

Course Component

Instruction Mode

Will some sections of the course be offered as distance learning?

Can this course be Audited?

Faculty and academic unit/department should indicate if auditing the course is allowed.

Will this course equate to another course?

If 'yes', course(s) should be equated; please provide equated course(s). If courses are equated, they will substitute for one another and credit will only be earned for one.

Faculty Load credit(s)

List credits allocated towards faculty load. Indicate the minimum and maximum credits. If faculty load credit(s) differ from students, a justification must be submitted on the Course Proposal form.

Cross-listing

Requesting Travel Approval?

Selecting yes requires attaching the travel course syllabus to the Curriculog new course proposal form. Please note that a travel course syllabus must include content, required text(s), instructional strategies, methods of evaluation, itinerary, schedule of lectures, and detailed assignments during the trip. Additional information may be requested separately.

Attachments and Check:

• Attach: any required forms or syllabi by navigating to the proposal toolbox on the right- hand side and selecting the paper clip, "Files" icon.
• Check: “I have completed all relevant parts of this form.” and “IF APPLICABLE, I have submitted a signed cross-listed form and/or syllabus for a travel course as requested within this proposal form.”

Validate and Launch

Select this option to begin the course approval workflow. (The first approver is the originator of the form.)

For questions about course submissions and approvals, email CourseInfo@chapman.eduor the Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit. 

Travel Courses

Travel courses offer a unique experiential dimension and play an important role in exposing students to the world and its various cultures.

Just as all new courses, first-time travel course criteria should be input online in a New Course Proposal Form in Curriculog. Within the Curriculog workflow, the course form is forwarded to the appropriate academic unit head/designated approver for review. Approved course forms are then submitted to the Associate Registrar for Catalog and Degree Audit. From there, the new travel course form will be directed for approval to the Director of the Center for Global Education, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, and the Vice Provost of Operations and Finance, if applicable.

The specific learning outcomes and course plan of the travel course should be laid out in the course syllabus with attention to the experiential aspects of learning.

Travel course guidelines may be found in the Faculty Travel Course Handbook.

Faculty travel leaders in travel courses must provide appropriate and consistent intellectual requirements for the students, the activities and travel experience must be oriented toward specific learning goals, while taking into consideration students’ need for some diversion in such an intensive learning experience. The following requirements should be addressed in the course proposal:

• The specific learning objectives and course plan should be clarified in a syllabus, the course requirements should be oriented to the travel and experiential plans.
• The travel course syllabus demonstrates appropriate academic rigor, and the travel experience is clearly distinct from simple tourism. The syllabus should include a clear pedagogical rationale for what might be called the "tourist" component of each course (tours to famous sites) in relation to the academic component and a description of use of specific assignments to integrate the academic and travel aspects.
• Each creditrequires at least 15 contact hours per week between faculty and students. Total contact hours should bespread out over theduration of thetravel course. While somereading should beencouraged during travel, theintensivenatureof such an experienceprecludes heavy reading requirements at that time.Nevertheless, some assessment of thelearning acquired by theexperienceitself must berequired,generally through apaper written upon thestudents’ return, for which notes (such as ajournal) should bekept during thetrip and/or somecombination of thetwo.
• Number of credits in a travel course is limited to a maximum of one credit per week of full-time travel/study, with one additional credit for required additional readings, papers, and class meetings before or after the course. A travel course can have no more than one week (to consist of at least 15 contact hours) of non-travel study before and/or after the travel, except in rare cases.
• It is recommended that most of the credit-bearing reading and discussion designed to illuminate the experience be completed prior to the trip, along with pre-trip testing or other appropriate evaluations. Pre-trip meetings with students should provide appropriate time for discussion and evaluation of the preparatory learning.
• The learning that builds upon the experience after the course is over can be evaluated during additional post-travel meetings. The complementary learning may be split, some occurring before and some after the travel experience. The same criterion for the total number of credits granted be held.
• Travel courses in the Interterm are limited to a maximum of four (4) credits.
• Travel course credit can only be applied for work or travel undertaken during the specified dates of the respective term (Academic Committee, Oct. 1, 1996).
• Travel courses must follow all relevant WASC guidelines for travel courses.
• Faculty members are required to complete the faculty evaluation form.
• A faculty member may not conduct two travel courses concurrently.
• No student may take two travel courses simultaneously.

All travel courses will be reviewed by the Graduate Academic Council for re-approval every three years, beginning in the academic year 2009–2010, and all travel courses will be included on record in the 2009–2010 graduate catalog.

The curriculum process for programs includes proposals for:

• New programs
• Revisions of existing programs
• Closing of programs

All curricular proposals for new programs, revisions of existing programs, and closures of programs must be reviewed by the academic unit curriculum committee, the program/department faculty, and the academic unit dean. Each review must provide a recommendation on approval or rejection of the program proposal. Interdisciplinary and Joint program proposals require decisions from program/department faculty, academic unit curriculum committees, and deans from all academic units involved in the interdisciplinary or Joint program being submitted.

Only academic units may propose new programs at the graduate level. These academic units are:

• Argyros College of Business and Economics
• Attallah College of Educational Studies
• Crean College of Health and Behavioral Sciences
• Dodge College of Film and Media Arts
• Fowler School of Engineering
• Fowler School of Law
• Schmid College of Science and Technology
• Wilkinson College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences
• School of Communication
• College of Performing Arts
• School of Pharmacy

Institutes and centers may not offer programs but work with programs/departments or academic units to develop and propose new programs.

All proposals for new programs and programs closing at the time of publication of this Handbook must be submitted using the forms listed in the Appendix-Formssection of this Handbook.

Proposals for revision of existing programs must be submitted through the online Curriculog proposal management system, unless advised otherwise. The Curriculog proposal management system will route the proposal to the academic unit approval groups, the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, and the Graduate Academic Council as needed. Once approved, the proposal information is transferred to the catalog for the next academic year.

Academic unit administrators and/or program/department heads submitting program proposals may request to appear before the Graduate Academic Council and/or the Long Range Planning Council to present the proposal and/or answer any questions. Before any decision-making body makes its decision, Council faculty may invite any appropriate faculty members or administrators to appear and present positions or answer any questions.

Under Review by Senate Executive Board Fall 2025

Please contact Melissa Samaniego, Assistant Director of CETL with any questions.

Experimental courses may be offered by a department or academic unit. They are designed to offer additional opportunities to explore experimental areas and subjects of special interest. They may be repeated for credit if the course content is different. The course title will be Experimental Course, but subtitles vary. Experimental courses are approved for one year. If an Experimental Course is to be offered for more than one year, the course must be approved as a new regular course with the new course number.

Changes to Organizational Architecture

Pursuant to the faculty’s advisory role as specified in the Faculty Constitution (section II.B), all proposed changes to the organizational architecture of the university should be brought to the Faculty Senate for evaluation. Such changes include, but are not limited to, the creation, closing, merging, or reorganization of colleges, schools, academic units, departments, programs, institutes, or centers. The Senate Executive Board may refer such proposals to the Faculty Councils for review of any curricular, budgetary, or strategic implications of the proposed change. The Councils will submit a written evaluation of the proposed change to the Senate Executive Board. The Senate Executive Board will forward the evaluations and recommendations to the Faculty Senate for review. A majority vote is required to support any advisory statement issued by the Faculty Senate.

Faculty Senate Councils

The Graduate Academic Council and the Undergraduate Academic Council oversee the curriculum at Chapman, ensuring that all academic programs meet high-quality standards consistent and aligned with Chapman’s mission, long-term plans, and goals.

Graduate Academic Council

The Graduate Academic Council is responsible for supporting and assisting individual academic units with developing and upholding academic policies related to graduate education and programs at Chapman University to ensure that all graduate programs meet high-quality standards that are consistent and aligned with Chapman’s mission, long-term plans and goals. Specifically, the Graduate Academic Council shall work with the individual units and across units to

1. Advise and assist in determining policies concerning academic standards for graduate programs;
2. Advise and assist in determining academic policies for graduate students as stipulated within the graduate catalog;
3. Review and make decisions regarding graduate petitions and appeals;
4. Review New Graduate Program Proposal submissions with a focus on curriculum and resources;
5. Review Complex Program Revisions with a focus on curriculum andresources;
6. Reviews program review documents from both the reviewers and the programs and writes recommendations to the Provost.
7. Advise the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education on graduate scholarly- creative activities and grants;
8. Review and select the Chapman University outstanding graduate student awards;
9. Review and make decisions regarding posthumous graduate degrees and certificates; and
10. Encourage innovation, integration, and interdisciplinarity in curricular and program offerings.

Faculty membership: The GAC consists of one faculty-rank librarian and one faculty member from each academic unit containing a graduate program. All members serve two-year, staggered terms.

Chair: The GAC Chair is elected by the corporate faculty, not the Council members, to a one- year term and serves as a SEB member. The candidates for Chair of the GAC shall normally be those GAC members continuing in their elected posts for a second (or later) academic year.

Ex-officio members: The Associate Vice President for Graduate Education, University Registrar, and Dean of Enrollment Services or their designees each serve as ex-officio members of the Council. The Council Chair will also appoint a liaison from each of the following to serve as ex- officio members:

1. the Undergraduate Academic Council,
2. the Assessment Committee,
3. the Academic Integrity Committee.
4. Student member: The Graduate Student Association shall appoint one graduate student to serve on the Council each academic year.

Voting privileges: Only faculty members of the GAC may vote on Council business. (Faculty Bylaws IV.B.6, as amended 3/18/2022)

Undergraduate Academic Council (UAC)

The primary purpose of the Undergraduate Academic Council is to oversee the university's undergraduate academic program, including general education requirements, long-range undergraduate academic planning, and undergraduate library resources and programs. The UAC shall work with the Office of the Provost and other administrative offices to fulfill this responsibility. The UAC consists of nine faculty members: (1) the Chair of the Undergraduate Student Standards Committee, (2) the Chair of the General Education Committee, (3) five additional faculty members with teaching responsibilities in the undergraduate program, (4) a faculty-rank librarian, plus (5) the Undergraduate Academic Council Chair. Ex Officio members include a member from the following offices: Provost, Registrar, Academic Advising, and a student representative appointed by the Student Government Association. Only faculty members may vote on Council business. (Faculty Bylaws IV.B.4, as amended 3/18/22)

Faculty Committees and Related University-wide Governance Groups

Specific to this Curriculum Handbook and the information in the Faculty Bylaws, additional committees in charge of curricular issues. Note that the link above will take you to the CANVAS LMS and the Faculty Governance Den, which requires a login. The most current version of the Faculty By-Laws, dated 3/18/2022, at the time of publication of this Handbook, can be found there.

The following committees also work on issues related to curriculum:

Assessment Committee is responsible for developing and implementing an assessment plan for the university, reviewing annual assessment reports from units, and program review. The Committee will work with the Vice Provost of Institutional Effectiveness and Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) and the Director of Accreditation and Assessment and will also liaise with the Undergraduate Academic Council and the Graduate Academic Councils.

Academic Unit Curriculum Committees

The Graduate Academic Council relies heavily on the standing Curriculum Committees of the academic units for vetting, peer review, and advice on curricular proposals. These Curriculum Committees review and approve new and revised course syllabi, review and provide their recommendations on all curricular proposals to the unit faculty: proposals for new programs, revisions of existing programs and program closures, proposals for new courses, changes in existing courses, or inactivation of a course. The unit's faculty makes the decisions regarding the new programs, revisions of existing programs, and program closures, which are then sent to the Graduate Academic Council for approval. The Graduate Academic Council will only consider curricular proposals that the unit’s curriculum committee has reviewed and, if required, by the faculty of the unit.

Formation of Curriculum Committees.

The unit's Curriculum Committee represents each academic unit/department or freestanding program. Each Curriculum Committee shall consist of at least three faculty members. Only faculty (including chairs/program directors) may serve as voting members. Deans may not serve on Curriculum Committees. Associate deans may serve as ex-officio members. Members of Curriculum Committees are elected by the faculty. The chair of the Curriculum Committee may be chosen by faculty or by those elected to serve on it. The chair should preferably be tenured. In the absence of a governing document from the school or college, each school or college forms curriculum committees that consist of one elected representative from each academic unit/department and free-standing program.

(Curriculum Committee language adopted by the Faculty Academic Council 4/12/2011, Language updated to reflect division of Faculty Academic Council to Graduate and Undergraduate Academic Councils)

Please see the graduate catalogfor the degree requirements.

Policies for graduate internship courses for academic credit are the responsibility of the Graduate Academic Council. Internships give students the opportunity to earn academic credit while gaining practical work experience in the field of their choice. A specific number of hours for each credit earned plus regular contact with an internship faculty advisor are required. Up to three credits per employer per term may be earned through internship courses 590/690/790. Graduate independent internship courses are graded on a Pass/No Pass basis.

To register for internships, students must submit a registration form and learning agreement to the Career Development Center. More information is available with the Career and Professional Development Center. Credit is not awarded retroactively for internships. The student must complete all appropriate forms before starting the independent internship class.

An Individual Study and Research course (599/699/799) is offered to students to study topics not provided for by regular curriculum offerings. The Individual Study and Research course is also different from the regular Research course in the research-based programs. Students should spend between 40 to 50 hours in instruction and research per semester for each credit of individual study.

Enrollment in individual study and research courses should be approved by the course instructor and the department chair/program director of the academic program offering the course. Then students must complete the individual study and research formavailable from the Office of the University Registrar obtain the required signatures and submit the form to the Office of the University Registrar.

The assessment of learning outcomes at Chapman occurs on a 3-year cycle. At the beginning of the assessment cycle, each program submits a schedule indicating which PLO(s) they will assess during which academic years. Every year, the faculty of all degree program at Chapman are responsible for completing an annual learning outcomes assessment report (ALOAR) for the PLO(s) scheduled for assessment in that academic year. ALOARs, which are submitted in Nuventive, ask faculty to describe performance benchmarks, their methods for assessing student learning, the results and an analysis of assessment, and plans for improving student learning. The reports are due June 30, following the conclusion of the academic year in all Semester-based programs. The due dates for the Trimester-based programs may differ.

The Assessment Committee, composed of faculty members appointed from various Colleges and Schools, conducts peer review of each degree program’s annual learning outcomes assessment report and provides recommendations and feedback. The Assessment Committee’s peer review is submitted in Nuventive and is available during the fall following the submission of ALOARs. Programs incorporate Assessment Committee recommendations into their assessment plan to enhance learning and close the loop.

For more information about assessment of learning outcomes, contact the Office of Accreditation and Assessmentor visit the Learning @ Chapmanwebsite.

Program review represents Chapman’s commitment to excellencein academicprograms through cyclical and comprehensivereview of educational effectiveness. Program review provides an opportunity for each program to reflect on its contribution to theuniversity and its strategicplan and to havean external review team provideinsight and recommendations through an analysis of theprogram’s self-study and asitevisit. Theresults of program review guideinstitutional planning, budgeting, and decision-making.

Program review occurs on a pre-determined scheduleat least once every seven years. Programs with external accreditation whose review cycle is longer than seven years may be asked to complete a mid-cycle review at the five-year mark. The Office of Accreditation and Assessment works in conjunction with the program to provide advisement, coordinate with external reviewers, and facilitate a smooth review process.

The program review process includes the following:

• Data analysis and review by the program/department
• Self-study report from the program/department
• Site visit and written report by an external review team
• Program response to the external reviewers’ report
• Advisory report to the Provost from a subcommittee composed of the representatives of:
  • Assessment Committee
  • Long Range Planning Council
  • Graduate Academic Council (both Graduate and Undergraduate Academic Councils for Integrated programs review).
• Response and recommendations from the Office of the Provost

Program Review for Accredited Degree Programs

Recognizing the generally significant efforts at the program/department level to prepare documents to meet an accreditation review, and to minimize the duplication of efforts involved, the University’s program review process for the Accredited Degree Programs has been modified as follows:

• Accredited programs will follow the process for conducting a self-study and planning and hosting a site visit in accordance with their accrediting body’s requirement
• Accredited programs will submit their self-study and other accreditation documents to the Director of Accreditation & Assessment
• The external agency’s accreditation report(s) will be submitted to the Director of Accreditation and Assessment who will provide the materials to a subcommittee composed of representatives from:
  • Assessment Committee
  • Long Range Planning Council
  • Graduate Academic Council and/or Undergraduate Academic Council
• A response from the subcommittee and the Office of the Provost will be provided to the program.

Program Review Timeline

The Office of Accreditation and assessment launches the planning process for program review in the spring the year prior to the review. During the spring and summer, the program submits potential external reviewer candidates, reviews data, and drafts their self-study. Site visits are scheduled for the fall with the external review team submitting their report shortly afterward.

The program is provided an opportunity to submit a response to the external reviewers’ report. The subcommittee’s report and the official response from the Office of the Provost are issued in the spring.

Externally accredited programs should follow the schedule set forth by their accreditor which may deviate from Chapman’s timeline.

Faculty, chairs and deans may use the program review websiteto find information on program review, including the schedule, guides, expectations, and templates for the self-study and site visit schedule. For additional assistance, deans, program chairs/directors, and other faculty directly involved with the planning and execution of program review may contact the Office of Accreditation and Assessment.

Reading and conference courses are offered only when the course is not being offered in the current term, but a student must complete degree requirements.

To enroll in reading and conference courses, students must submit a completed reading andconference form, available from the Office of the University Registrar, with the signatures of their academic advisor, department chair/program director, and course instructor.

After receiving approval, the student must submit a copy of the form to the Office of the University Registrar. A minimum of five hours of instruction for each credit is required for reading and conference courses.

Before signing the form for a reading & conference course, please make sure that the student satisfies the minimum requirements for the course, including the prerequisites.

In special cases, a reading and conference designation may be used when a specific course does not meet the minimum enrollment and the instructor and the program/department head agree to offer it as a reading and conference course in order for students to stay on track in completing degree requirements. In such special cases, the students will be enrolled by the Registrar Office.

Independent internships (590/690/790), independent research and individual study (599/699/799), and courses taught as reading and conference (including the courses offered as reading and conference due to low enrollment) are considered self-directed courses and do not count towards a full-time faculty member’s teaching load. Instead, the faculty member is paid a supplemental payment. The schedule of supplemental pay rates is maintained by the Provost’s office. The payment is processed once the faculty member assigns a grade for the self-directed course, generally within one month after the end of the term.

Part-time faculty members are not permitted to teach independent internship and individual study. Part-time faculty may teach a reading and conference course only with the approval of the department chair/program director or associate dean and the Vice Provost of Operations and Finance. Any request for full-time staff to teach independent internship, independent research and study courses must receive the approval of the staff member’s supervisor and the Vice Provost of Operations and Finance.

Academic Unit: College or school

Academic Unit Curriculum Committee: An academic unit curriculum committee operates at the school or college level. An academic unit may have a single curriculum committee, a separate graduate curriculum committee, or curriculum committees that are organized by types of programs, such as professional and graduate. For the purpose of approving program proposals, the academic unit determines the appropriate curriculum committee for each degree program.

Area of Study: An area of study within a graduate program is a portion of the graduate degree program that includes a subset of courses in a specific subject area or subfield used to complete the graduate degree. The area of study does not appear on the transcript.

Bridge Program: A “bridge program” is not a degree-granting program. It is an agreement between the faculty of an undergraduate major program and a graduate degree program that gives preference for admission to students in the undergraduate major program based on criteria determined by the graduate program. A bridge program does not require approval from either the Graduate or Undergraduate Academic Councils, nor are such programs listed in the Graduate or Undergraduate catalogs as degree programs, although they may be described in the college/school and/or department narrative sections of the Catalog.

Certificate for Academic Credit: A sequence of courses identified in a subject area that leads to a specific skill acquisition. Such a certificate program is approved by appropriate program faculty and Graduate Academic Council, and it is listed on a transcript upon completion.

Credential: A graduate credential is a certificate program recognized by an outside agency. Upon competition, the graduate credential provides evidence that the requirements of an outside agency have been met. Graduate credentials are offered in the Graduate Programs in Education and Speech Pathology at Chapman University.

Degree Program: A sequence of courses and requirements that lead to the awarding of an academic degree. Graduate Degrees at Chapman consist of Ph.D., D.Sc., Pharm.D., D.P.T., J.D., M.M.S., M.F.A, M.B.A., M.S., M.M., M.A.

Emphasis: An emphasis within a graduate degree is an identified subfield within the subject area of the graduate degree. The emphasis includes a distinct subset of courses within a degree subject area that are specific to the emphasis and used to complete the graduate degree. An emphasis appears on the transcript.

Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Program: An Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Program is a program that allows undergraduate students to be conditionally accepted into a graduate degree program while still completing undergraduate requirements. Up to 15 credits of graduate courses may be shared between the undergraduate degree program and the specific graduate program. Integrated programs require the approval of both Graduate and Undergraduate Academic Councils for new programs, revisions, and closures.

Program: An overarching term that refers to all types of academic graduate programs, including

• graduate degrees
• graduate certificates for academic credit
• graduate emphases
• graduate areas of study
• graduate specializations
• graduate credentials
• graduate joint programs
• integrated undergraduate/graduate programs

Program/Department: Academic units may include subunits that form the organizational structure of the academic unit. The reference to Program/Department is specifically to subunits responsible for particular programs. These subunits may be called divisions, departments, programs, or some combination of such organizational subunits. Each Program/Department is comprised of full-time faculty, usually organized by a specific academic discipline or group of disciplines and/or program offering. Each Program/Department is responsible for one or more degree programs within the academic unit. The academic unit determines the organization of faculty into Program/Department groupings.

Program/Department Faculty: For curriculum, Program/Department faculty are full-time academic unit faculty appointed to a Program/Department responsible for graduate programs.

Program/Department Faculty Representative: The program/department faculty representative represents all faculty in a program/department and has the authority to sign off on program approvals for new programs, revisions, or closures on behalf of the program/department faculty responsible for an academic program. The program/department faculty determine the program/department faculty representative and may be a faculty member in the program/department, a chair or division head, or an associate dean.

Specialization: A specialization is an optional subset of courses offered by a graduate degree program that may be included in the overall degree.

Term: Refers to semester, trimester or interterm. When distinctions need to be made as to type of term, the specific word will be used.

It is the department chair/academic program head’s responsibility to ensure the following:

• all academic unit/department syllabi meet the Chapman syllabus requirements
• syllabi for all sections of the same course are consistent with respect to
  • the course/catalog description
  • the course and program learning outcomes
• all syllabi are posted to the Online Syllabi System each term

Requirement to Upload Syllabus to Online Syllabi System

Maintaining syllabi, each term is required for several purposes, including transfer and articulation of Chapman courses for students who transfer from Chapman or who require information about past courses, as well as for the university and programs accreditation. With the Faculty Senate approval, the syllabi are provided to the student body at the request of the Student Government Association.

The Online Syllabus Bank is a homegrown Chapman System updated every term to list all courses offered at Chapman. It consists of the following:

• Syllabus Upload Page(Secure: Available to faculty teaching the course/section and administrative staff given appropriate permission)
• Online Syllabus System Documentation and Instructions(Also available from Syllabus Upload Page)
• Syllabus View Page(Secure: Available to all faculty, staff, and students with Chapman login)
• Law School Syllabus View Page(Not Secure: Available to the general public per accreditation standards requirements)

Syllabi should be posted no later than the end of the fourth week of classes. Department chairs/academic program heads may ask the academic unit/department assistant to collect and post syllabi or ask faculty to do so themselves.

Should syllabi for an instructor in a program/unit not be posted or made available through the online syllabus system as required, the program/department head must have paper or digital copies on file for use.

Required Syllabus Content

While the format of the syllabus is not proscribed, all Chapman syllabi must contain, at a minimum, the items listed below:

Course designation, number, and title

The exact title, designation and number of the course as listed in the catalog.

Contact information and office hours for all instructors in the course

Contact information should include office location, phone, and email address for all instructors in the course.

Catalog Description

The exact wording of the course description in the catalog, including prerequisites. The last part of the description regarding the grading method, when a course is offered, the course fee, if applicable, and the number of credits should also be included.

For courses that have a generic catalog description but a unique course topic, a syllabus should include a separate course topic description.

Course Learning Outcomes

Specify the intended learning outcomes of the course. The outcomes are brief statements of student abilities or behaviors that can be observed or demonstrated as a result of the course.

Program Learning Outcomes

Specify the learning outcomes for the degree program that the course supports and, if not apparent, describe how course outcomes support the program outcomes.

Content

Provide a comprehensive sketch of the course content so that another scholar in the same field could readily judge the topics being covered.

Current Required Text(s) and Reading(s)

• Typically, all courses should have a required text that is current to the field, except for the use of primary sources.
• If supplementary or recommended texts are provided, those should be listed in a separate category.
• Publisher and date of publication should be indicated for each book, and appropriate bibliographic citation forms should be followed consistently.
• Required reading must be challenging for the course level, both in content and amount.

Instructional Strategies

• A variety of instructional strategies should be specified. These may include lectures, written assignments, oral presentations by students, and exercises in critical thinking.
• If a class is approved to be taught utilizing online teaching strategies in whole or in part, the information about distance education modality must be provided in the syllabus.
• Regular writing that reflects all aspects of the writing process is expected in all classes where it is an effective means of learning. If writing assignments are not included, this section should explicitly explain their absence.
• Graduate courses should require students to use a significant number of learning resources other than textbooks, such as primary sources, monographs, and journals, in research projects/papers, etc.

Methods of Evaluation

• List all exams, papers, and other graded requirements with grade weights for each requirement
• Grade scale for the final course letter or numerical grades
• Dates of exams and due dates for other requirements (to the extent possible)
• Attendance policy guidelines and impact of attendance on the grade
• For courses that do not require regular evaluation, such as in-class examinations, syllabi must provide a rationale for such an exception. These syllabi, including the rationale, must be submitted to the academic unit/department for review.
• Graduate courses that are cross-listed with undergraduate courses must require additional assignments and a comprehensive evaluation process based on graduate-level performance expectations.

Other Requirements

Students should be provided with dates of examinations and other important due dates. A weekly calendar showing topics covered by date/week, exams, and all other due dates could be beneficial for students in planning their studies. It is always a good policy to indicate that such a calendar is subject to change.

The course syllabus must include the following statements:

Chapman University’s Academic Integrity Policy

“Chapman University is a community of scholars that emphasizes the mutual responsibility of all members to seek knowledge honestly and in good faith. Students are responsible for doing their own work and academic dishonesty of any kind will be subject to sanction by the instructor/administrator and referral to the university Academic Integrity Committee, which may impose additional sanctions including expulsion. Please review the full description of Chapman University's policy on Academic Integrity.

Chapman University’s Students with Disabilities Policy

Chapman University’s Anti-Discrimination Policy

“Chapman University is committed to ensuring equality and valuing diversity, including of backgrounds, experiences and viewpoints. Students and professors are reminded to show respect at all times as outlined in Chapman’s Harassment and Discrimination Policy. Please review the full description of Harassment and Discrimination Policy. Please review the full description of the Harssment and Discrimination Policy. Any violations of this policy should be discussed with the professor, the Dean of Students and/or otherwise reported in accordance with this policy.”

Optional Statements that may be included:

• Chapman University Statement on Student Support at Chapman University
• Chapman University Statement on Religious Accommodation

Bibliography

• • It is strongly recommended that faculty members consult with their subject liaison librarian or university librarian when developing the course bibliography. The librarian could help to identify current holdings and electronic resources available for the course. Contacting the librarian in advance will allow the library to ensure that all necessary information resources are available on time for the course.
  • Based on the nature of the courses and the relevance, currency and accessibility of the materials, the bibliography for graduate courses should normally include monographs, journal articles, etc. and other resources in addition to textbook type materials.
  • Format may vary by discipline (MLA, APA, etc.), but should be consistent and include all information according to the chosen format to identify and retrieve the publication or the source.

Travel Courses – Special Requirements Related to the Trip

Provide the following:

• • Itinerary: destination, length of the trip, sites to be visited, and how these visits connect to what is covered in the course
  • Schedule of lectures before, during, and after the trip
  • Detailed assignments during the trip

A Sample Syllabus is provided in the Appendixat the end of this document.

Graduate Academic Council Calendar: 2025-2026

Key: 

• GAC is Graduate Academic Council   
• LRPC is Long Range Planning Council
• UAC is Undergraduate Academic Council 
• SEB is Senate Executive Board

New Degree Programs only. The planning and submission process begins a year and a half before a program can be listed in the catalog.

For inclusion in the 2027-2028 catalog:

February 1, 2026

• Deadline to submit Intention to file a New Degree Program Proposal to the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education

February - March, 2026

• Complete consultation process with university offices/administrators
• Obtain recommendations on approval from the academic unit dean, curriculum committee, and program/department faculty

April 1, 2026

Deadline to file final new degree program proposal for review:

• Faculty Senate Councils
  • GAC/UAC in April-May
  • LPRC in June-September
  • SEB in September
• Senate recommendations on approval (October-November 2025)
• Provost recommendation on approval (December 2025)
• Decision by the Board of Trustees (March 2026)

• February 1, 2026 Deadline to submit the Catalog information for New Degree Program (if submitted to BoT for approval).

All other curricular changes for inclusion in the 2026-2027 catalog:

Deadlines:

November 15, 2025:

• [PDF form] New graduate certificate for academic credit
• [PDF form] New graduate emphasis, area of study, specialization, or credential (based on an existing graduate degree program)
• [PDF form] New integrated program (based on an existing graduate degree program)
• [Curriculog form] Complex program revisions

December 1, 2025:

• [Curriculog form] Simple program revisions
• [PDF form] Program closures

• [Curriculog form] Changes to the school/college/department narrative section in Catalog
• [Curriculog form] Catalog information on new graduate degree programs (for proposals submitted by April 1, 2026, reviewed by the Faculty Senate and presented to the Board of Trustees)
• [Curriculog form] Catalog information on new graduate certificate for academic credit, new graduate emphasis, area of study, specialization, or credential, new integrated program (for approved proposals)

February 15, 2026:

• [Curriculog form] New courses (except the travel courses)
• [Curriculog form] Changes to existing courses
• [Curriculog form] Inactivated courses

Important information about the proposal submission process:

The following proposals are submitted using standard [PDF] forms to document approval recommendations unless otherwise notified:

• New degree program proposals
• New graduate certificate for academic credit
• New graduate emphasis, area of study, specialization, or credential
• New integrated program
• Program closures

See Appendix-Formsfor links to these forms.

In addition, Catalog information is submitted through the Curriculogmanagement system for:

• New degree program proposals (already reviewed by the Faculty Senate and presented to the Board of Trustees)
• Approved:
  • New graduate certificate for academic credit
  • New graduate emphasis, area of study, specialization, or credential
  • New integrated program

The following proposals/forms are submitted only through the Curriculogmanagement system:

• All course proposals
• Simple and complex program revision proposals

For further information on course and program proposal processes, please see the instructions provided in this handbook. Questions can be directed to the following:

• Course Proposals: Stephen Hall, Associate Registrar, sdhall@chapman.edu
• Graduate Program Proposals: GradEd@chapman.edu

Note: if you find any errors or have any questions about this handbook, please contact The Office of the Associate Vice President for Graduate Education at GradEd@chapman.edu

Program Proposal Forms

Revisions to all academic programs are done through Curriculog.

the Use forms below for new program proposals, closures, and cross-listed courses. If you have difficulty downloading and saving the forms below to your computer desktop or files, please contact at magallan@chapman.edu. Please do not make edits directly onto the original forms.

Budget Template for New Graduate Degree Program Proposals

New Undergraduate Major/Graduate Degree Program Form

New Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate Degree Form 

New Graduate Emphasis, Area of Study, Credential, Specialization Form

New Certificate for Academic Credit Form

Closing an Undergraduate Major/Graduate Degree Program Form

Closing a Minor, Emphasis, Area of Study or Certificate Program Form

Cross-listed Course Form (to be attached to Curriculog Course Proposal)

Shared Courses Approval Form

NOTE: all forms should be fillable PDFs. If you are having difficulty, contact Lonnise Magallanez magallan@chapman.edu for the latest version of the form needed.