|
Home > Development, Review, and Approval of Academic Programs > Council Minutes > April 6, 2007
April 6, 2007
488 Children's Rehabilitation Center
Attendees: Jim Beattie, Susan Berry, Barbara Brandt, Judith Buchanan, Michael Brown, Frank Cerra, Jennifer Cieslak, , Shirley Nelson Garner, Sandra Godden, Kristin Janke, Linda Lindeke, Jodi Lulich, Linda Perkowski, Mary Rowan, and John Ziegenhagen
Unable to attend: Judy Garrard, Kristin Anderson, Ed Combe
Charge to the Council and Discussion
Dr. Cerra thanked Council members for agreeing to serve on the Academic Council sharing that this process has taken two years to develop.
Dr. Cerra gave a brief overview of how we got to this point:
The health professions are in the biggest flux ever seen since 1965.
There are 204 separate accrediting bodies that visit our health professions programs within a five-year cycle and regulation continues to increase.
As a delivery system, there are changing demands in health professions. Prior to 1980, health care education and practice were on the same page. In the 1980's, education and practice went in two different directions with the advent of managed care. Health systems inform us that we aren't teaching skills that the providers needed. Until recently, we weren't even aware of the health care provider shortages in medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, and nursing.
Minnesota is an interesting state in that we are considered #1 in the nation for health care status, and we are also #1 in the gap in health disparities.
The AHC has had a burst of new professional programs trying to meet the needs of the health care system. Out of this has come a whole new group of degrees and certificates, including international programs. An example is nursing developing a nurse practitioner's program to meet the challenge of chronic disease; hence, the development of the Doctor of Nursing Practice.
Our students rotate through 1,739 teaching/practice sites. There are 5000 adjunct faculty. What quality control do we have? Who is teaching?
Another new force - interdisciplinary/ interprofessional education. During the October 2006 AHC Deans Retreat, the deans created the “Deans Council Leadership Statement on Interprofessional Education” dated December 12, 2006, a two-page statement about the mission centrality of interprofessional education.
Until now, the only formal review process within the University was in the Graduate School. We have worked with John Ziegenhagen and Shirley Garner on how to establish this process for the health profession schools.
The process development has gone through many levels of input and review: AHC Associate Deans of Education, John Ziegenhagen, and the Graduate School. The Deans Council reviewed and approved the process.
The Board of Regents (BOR) has gone through a process of redefining delegation of authority. The BOR is the only group to grant a degree and keeps tight control of what it must approve. The BOR and faculty have a partnership.
Dr. Cerra asked members to think about how each health professions school has changed. Are the health care professionals we turn out ready to meet the demand. As interprofessional care and new delivery systems develop, health care professions roles are being redefined.
Are we really meeting educational competencies? Are our students capable of taking care of someone? Are they EMR competent?
What kinds of expertise is on the Academic Council? People who have experience with the evaluation of outcomes, quality, and performance sites.
When the Council is reviewing a new proposal, some of the questions members need to ask are:
Where does it fit into the mission of the school?
Is it core to the University's mission?
Where does it fit in with other degree programs?
Do faculty have time to teach the courses?
What about health insurance - liabilities?
Ethical objectives - is this “top shelf?” Is this what people deserve? In his mind, accreditation standards are minimum standards.
The Council will serve in an advisory capacity to Dr. Cerra. Barbara Brandt will chair the Council. The majority of proposals will come forward to the Council for review, but some may be straightforward and won't require Academic Council review and advice. Dr. Cerra will move those forward. Dr. Cerra requests that once the Council has reviewed a proposal that they supply him with a written report. He will then make the final recommendation and, as appropriate, advance the proposal to the Provost's Office.
In closing, Dr. Cerra said this is a work in progress and we will work together to determine the best way to move this process forward.
AHC Academic Program Proposal Development and Review Processes
Barbara Brandt shared that the University of Wisconsin's registrar called her about program proposals and asked how the AHC moved them forward. This call was precipitated by the University of Wisconsin Graduate School's rejection of the Doctorate of Nursing Practice degree. The registrar stated her concern for the University of Wisconsin system if they do not offer these degrees. She shared her concern that proprietary schools will enter the state if public institutions do not offer these degrees.
With the growth of new degree program and certificate proposals, issues of oversight have become more concerning. In the past nine months, Barbara has been meeting monthly with Gail Dubrow, John Ziegenhagen, and Craig Swan to identify the core issues.
Many proposals come from outside the AHC such as from the College of Continuing Education. A template has been developed for faculty to use when developing their proposal along with a five-year financial proforma template. Both documents are being finalized and will be distributed to Council members in the near future.
In the near future, Jennifer Cieslak will be setting up a portal site for the Academic Council members to use.
Context of U of M Academic Program Development and Oversight
John Ziegenhagen stated that he is working on a pathway document showing the interfaces between the Provost's office, Graduate School, and AHC. Once this has been completed and approved he will disseminate to Council members. He is involved in the University's accreditation processes and is well aware of the need to meet accreditation criteria. More cross-collegiate proposals are coming forward, more interprofessional in education and research, more internal programs. There needs to be quality assurance and responsiveness. He shared that the BOR is very clear that their role is not to make judgments about individual programs; rather, they are responsible for policies and assuring that the review and quality processes are in place.
John referred the Council to the University's program review framework, which is noted in the written charge to the Council. That framework includes the principles of quality, centrality, comparative advantage, demand, efficiency and effectiveness, growth and leveraging of resources. These principles govern all academic programs at the University.
Academic Council Training and Handbook
Jennifer Cieslak provided a brief overview of the contents of the handbook. The handbook will be added to over time.
Tab 2 reviews the history of what programs and certificates have been processed within the AHC, what programs are under review, and the programs waiting for review.
Members were asked to review Tab 3 which gives an overview of the proposed pathway for program proposals, and provides a visual representation of the council's advisory role.
Tab 3 also includes the Draft “Review Questions for New or Changed Program Proposals Emanating from AHC Schools, Colleges, and Centers.” The draft questions mirror the Process document that is being developed to guide and assist those development academic program proposals within the AHC. (This document is in its final stages of refinement and will be shared with the Council soon.) Jennifer asked members to review the draft questions in preparation to finalize the questions. Jennifer will email the draft questions to members and stated that these will be brought to closure via email with a goal of bringing to closure within 10 days.
Tab 4 contains material regarding interprofessional education, including the “Deans Council Leadership Statement on Interprofessional Education” dated December 12, 2006 and the “New Interprofessional Course Recommendation Pathway to Regents Approval”.
Tab 5 of the manual, Dr. Cerra's July 2006 AHC Strategic Positioning report to the Board of Regents, is provided as background information.
In closing, Jennifer asked members to:
Review the draft review questions. Jennifer will email the draft questions to members and stated that these will be brought to closure via email with a goal of bringing to closure within 10 days.
Take the first proposal, from the Division of Dental Hygiene. Committee members will be asked to review this prior to the next Council meeting.
Begin thinking about how the group would like to operate - reviewing future proposals as a group or develop subgroups.
Meeting adjourned at 9:30 am.
|
Feedback | Notice of Privacy Practices
|
|
|
