This chapter describes a process for assessing programmatic initiatives with broad-ranging goals with the use of a mixed-methods design. Using an example of a day-long teaching development conference, this chapter provides practitioners step-by-step guidance on how to implement this assessment process.

This paper describes how various formal planning approaches were developed and applied at Pennsylvania State University. Phases (horizontal reduction, vertical reallocation, strategic planning, and strategic management) are identified as are principles including planning for change on the margins and continuity, providing for feedback, and…

Review of literature concerning the use of program review in higher education lists sources discussing the review process, focusing on the links between program review and other institutional processes, and addressing application of program review principles and practices to different higher education settings. Critical factors for successful use…

Oregon State University implemented Total Quality Management in nine phases: exploration; establishing a pilot study team; defining customer needs; adopting the breakthrough planning process; performing breakthrough planning in divisions; forming daily management teams; initiating cross-functional pilot projects; implementing cross-functional…

Performance funding for public colleges is attractive to state policymakers but volatile and difficult to implement. It requires levels of collaboration, cooperation, patience, and persistence unusual in state government and a commitment to institutional goals, performance standards, and coordinated activities rare in academic governance. However,…

Although selecting goals and indicators is the most challenging task of performance funding, implementation requires development of other critical elements: success criteria to measure institutional performance; indicator weights for percent of funding allocated to each indicator; an allocation method for setting the relationship between…

A study of program review at 156 community colleges shows that it is widely used for accountability and program improvement; that substantial use is made of results; and that key leadership support, organizational communication, a clear understanding of purposes, and frequent action on program review recommendations at all organizational levels…