May 3, 2023
Dear Faculty and Staff,
I am reaching out on behalf of the Academic Portfolio Review Task Force (PRTF) to request suggestions and recommendations regarding the portfolio review rubric that we will be developing throughout the summer. The PRTF recently held two listening sessions that were open to all faculty and staff on the campus – on May 2 and May 3. We appreciated the faculty and staff that were able to come to those sessions and provide perspectives and nuances unique to their programs that would help us make decisions in the development of the rubric.
We know that this is an extremely busy time for a lot of faculty and staff on campus, and wanted to ensure that individuals who would like to have input prior to the development of the rubric but were unable to attend either of the listening sessions, can do so. Therefore, below is a link to a form that enables you to provide input on the rubric development.
I would like to provide some context around what we are asking for at this time. The PRTF is solely in charge of building the rubric, and is charged with:
- developing the way in which the rubric is scored
- determining if any data categories (found here) are weighted, and if so, in what ways they are weighted
- determining if undergraduate and graduate programs have different weights on categories
- determining the type of contextual data that is collected to either be part of the rubric or provide an understanding for the information collected in the other categories.
The PRTF is not responsible for, nor can influence, the existing 6 data categories. With the help of faculty and staff providing their suggestions and recommendations, members of the PRTF can determine how various categories are weighted and the contextual information that is collected to help explain the scores or data in the 6 data categories or provide supplemental information that is not collected in the original 6 data categories.
In responding to the form with your suggestions, some questions to reflect on would be the following:
- As you review the 6 data categories, what do you feel would be important to capture about your undergraduate and graduate programs that currently are not captured?
- What types of questions or information would be important to be asked of your program that would help someone external to your program understand the data that would be revealed in the first 6 data categories (e.g., changes in the program, accreditation, dependence on other programs)?
- Are there data categories, or items within categories, that should be given differential weight (greater weight or lesser weight)? And consider whether these weights on specific data items or categories should be different for undergraduate and graduate programming.
The members of the PRTF understand and value that programs on this campus vary in their strengths and goals, and thus, having your feedback and insight would be informative in the building of the rubric that will be used to evaluate academic programs on the UNC Greensboro campus.
Given our tight timeframe (please find the time frame for the PRTF here) of developing the rubric this summer, having your recommendations and suggestions by Friday, May 12, 2023, would be important.
Kelly L. Wester, PhD, LCMHC, NCC
Professor ｜ Department Chair
Department of Counseling and Educational Development
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
PO Box 26170 ｜Greensboro, NC 27402
336.223.5312 ｜[email protected] https://soe.uncg.edu/directory/faculty-and-staff/bio-kellywester/