Phd Program Evaluation Criteria Derived From Report And Recommendations Of AAU Committee On Graduate Eduction (October, 1998):

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO

PhD PROGRAM SELF-STUDY

PART II

I. Program Objectives: Briefly the objectives of the PhD program, in specific relation to: •scholarly contributions to a discipline; •the interconnections between that discipline and related areas; •the application of this knowledge and experience to careers after completion of the degree.

II. Recruitment and Admissions: 1. Briefly describe the admission criteria for your PhD program, e.g.: •academic quality •diversity (ethnic, geographic, etc.) •availability of support •relevance of student’s preparation and intended study to departmental teaching and research •likelihood of eventual placement

2. List what credentials are included in a typical applicant’s portfolio (e.g. transcripts, letters of recommendation, personal statements, writing samples, portfolios, GREs, TOEFL, other test scores), and describe why the department feels that these credentials match its criteria and are predictive of success in the program and beyond.

3. What effort is made for the recruitment of students to the program? •general •diversity recruitment, including non-degree programs preparing students for graduate study and other “pipeline” activities.

4. Provide an overall assessment: is the program successfully recruiting, admitting and enrolling the students it wants?

III. Financial Support: 1. What are the program’s stated policies on financing graduate education, including information about educational costs and prospects for future employment? How are the program’s policies communicated to admitted students?

2. Briefly describe the nature and quality of available support, including •multi-year guarantees •support for travel to conferences and other research expenses •non-financial support, including space, computers, library, social support, etc.

3. Describe departmental policies and practices on work requirements for graduate assistantships, including nature of tasks, progression of responsibilities, skill building, and mentoring. How are these policies implemented and monitored?

IV. Curriculum and Mentoring: 1. Briefly describe the distinctive features of the curriculum, by comparison with typical PhD curricula in the discipline. Note any particular focus or concentrations in the program. 2. Does the department provide instruction for PhD students in: •writing? •oral presentation? •professional and research ethics? •teaching? •grant-writing?

3. What are the program’s mechanisms for assessing student progress and for advising students of their progress?

4. What are the program’s procedures for counseling, outplacing or dismissing students whose progress is unsatisfactory?

5. What policy guidelines and incentives does the department provide to faculty to promote excellence in teaching and mentoring candidates for the PhD?

6. What job counseling and placement assistance is provided?

V. Faculty [see also Addendum 1]: 1. Provide 1-page summary of Part II of department’s AAU report and progress since its submission.

2. Briefly describe the areas of strength and weakness in the faculty. How do these match the areas of concentration in the curriculum and predominant areas of research interest among PhD students?

3. Briefly describe any departmental plans for faculty development over the next five years, including hiring, mentoring, and reinvigoration.

VI. Program Attainments [see also Addenda 2, 3, 4]: 1. Briefly describe any new teaching methodologies used or developed by TAs or other evidence of quality of teaching by TAs

2. Briefly describe program policies or expectations requiring or encouraging publication of thesis- related material

VII. Self-Evaluation and Policy Implementation: 1. What are the department’s goals and expectations for the PhD program over the next five years?

2. Has department done exit surveys of graduates? Of students who leave program? If so, summarize results.

3. Evaluate the current size of the program, especially in relation to: •critical mass of faculty and students •departmental infrastructure •financial support •programmatic breadth •student mentoring and apprenticeship •placement •typical size of AAU departments 4. Is the current size the appropriate size for the program? Should it be larger or smaller, while maintaining or improving quality?

revised 4/19/99 Addenda

Addendum 1: provide 2-page biographical data (such as NIH/NSF biodata format or condensed cv) for each member of graduate faculty, showing major research attainments that contribute to the national visibility of the program.

Addendum 2: list research presentations, publications, and awards by PhD students during AY98.

Addendum 3: list year of degree and initial placements of all PhD recipients in past 5 academic years. If postdoc, list eventual academic placement (when relevant).

Addendum 4: in two pages maximum, summarize major accomplishments of graduates, including •major publications •major awards •notable graduates who have made a major contribution to the discipline •societal impact, especially in Illinois

6/15/99