Educational Policy Committee (EPC)
Guidelines for Program and Course Revisions

The following guidelines are intended to help Deans, Department Chairs and Chairs of School Curriculum Committees coordinate campus wide curriculum change with the EPC. Questions about these guidelines should be directed to the Chair of EPC.

Changes that do not usually require readings at EPC, but require EPC Chair's signature:

  • Course catalog description changes
  • Course title changes
  • Pre-requisite changes
  • Course format change (e.g. changing to a discussion or lab)
  • Renumbering of courses EXCEPT when the course is being changed from lower to upper, or upper to lower division status.
  • Experimental courses may be offered twice at the department level. A Course Change Form must be submitted for each semester that an experimental course is offered. After an experimental course is offered twice, it should be evaluated by the department curriculum committee for possible inclusion as a regular departmental offering, at which time standard procedures for approval of new courses are to be followed (see below).

Changes requiring EPC approval:

  • All new courses to majors or minors
  • All unit changes in courses
  • All unit changes in majors or minors
  • Course changes that impact the General Education requirement
  • Course changes that impact the major or minor
  • Course changes that impact other departments or schools (e..g. additions or deletions to a major or minor)

Please use the Curricular Forms found on this website to submit your changes. Use the Directions on that page for correct routing information.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE GUIDELINES

FOR EPC PROGRAM AND COURSE REVISIONS:

Revisions of existing courses/new courses or programs to general education courses must be submitted to the General Education Subcommittee and then to EPC.

Revisions of existing /new courses or programs to graduate programsand courses MUST be submitted to the Graduate Studies Committee and then to EPC.

Guidelines for EPC Review of Program Review

The EPC will discuss each Program Review document as a committee of the whole. Each document will first be reviewed in detail by two readers who are EPC members. Those members will read the documents and respond in writing to the Department. The Department can then respond in writing. These two documents will be provided to the EPC when the Department presents their report to the entire committee. After the report is approved, the two committee members will draft the EPC recommendations to be forwarded to Academic Affairs.

The two-member team should review the document, summary and/or outside reviewer's statement, checking that the following items have been addressed. Suggestions will be made if necessary, noting any concerns or praise.

  1. The departments curricular mission. Is the philosophy coherent? Is it appropriate for a comprehensive undergraduate institution that aspires to provide a strong liberal arts education for all undergraduates and to provide selected graduate programs in response to the professional development needs of the region? Does it uphold the SSU Mission Statement and Diversity Vision Statement in its dedication to perspectives of diversity?
  2. The curriculum itself. Is it current? Does it have clearly stated goals that are consistent with the department's mission? Is it well focused? Does it reflect an appreciation of the richness of differences between us? What are its greatest strengths? Its weaknesses? Is the faculty appropriately prepared to deliver it?
  3. Program effectiveness. How effective does the department seem to be in preparing its students (both majors and GE students) as it wishes? Does the department have an assessment strategy adequate to reveal what is working very well and what is not? Is there evidence that the department has used assessment finding to guide program change?
  4. Resource use. Are existing program resources being used to the greatest effect?

(This document will eventually become part of the updated Curriculum Guide. EPC passed the program review language in Spring of 2008.)