Guide to Graduate Course and Program Approval

Guide to Graduate Program Approval

University of California, Los Angeles

March 2014

This guide was prepared in collaboration with the Registrar’s Office, the

Graduate Division, and the Graduate Council and is intended to assist faculty

and staff in preparing graduate program proposals. It represents the policies

and procedures that have been approved by the Graduate Council and the

Graduate Division. The Council and the Division periodically review this

document and issue updates or clarifications.

The Academic Senate is the office of record for programs and courses.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part One: Graduate Council and the Graduate Division ......................................................... 3

Graduate Council ............................................................................................................................3

Committee on Degree Programs .....................................................................................................3

Graduate Division ...........................................................................................................................3

Delegation ......................................................................................................................................3

Part Two: Online Resources .................................................................................................. 4

Part Three: Changing Existing Program Requirements ............................................................ 5

I. Program Requirements Update Form .....................................................................................5

II. Preparing the Proposed Text ..................................................................................................5

III. Deadline to Submit Program Changes .....................................................................................6

IV. Sample Showing Tracked Changes ..........................................................................................7

Part Four: Propose a New Graduate Degree Program ............................................................ 8

Preparation for Proposing a New Graduate Degree Program ............................................................8

Part Five: Organization of New Program Proposal ................................................................ 10

I. Sample Cover Page .............................................................................................................. 10

II. Proposal Sections ................................................................................................................. 11

III. Required Appendices ........................................................................................................... 16

Part Six: Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines ...................................................................... 19

I. Departmental Letters of Commitment for IDPs ..................................................................... 19

II. Eligible Master’s and Doctoral Committee Lists for IDPs ........................................................ 22

III. Procedural Guidelines for the Appointment of IDP Chairs and Faculty Administrative

Committees ......................................................................................................................... 22

IV. Guidelines for Interdisciplinary Certificates for Matriculated Graduate Students ................... 24

V. Guidelines for Suspending Admission to a Graduate Degree Program .................................... 25

VI. Graduate Concurrent and Articulated Programs.................................................................... 26

VII. Policies for Self Supporting Programs ................................................................................... 26

VIII. Undergraduate/Graduate Hybrid Degree Programs ..............................................................

IX. Joint Degree Programs ......................................................................................................... 29

X. Dual Degree Programs ......................................................................................................... 30

XI. Departmental Scholars ......................................................................................................... 30

Part Seven: Overview of Routing and Approval Workflow .................................................... 31

I. Establish a New Graduate Program, Interdepartmental Degree Program, or Senate-Regulated

Certificate ............................................................................................................................ 31

II. Establish a New Joint Graduate Degree Program ................................................................... 33

III. Establish a New Graduate Degree Designation/Title ............................................................. 35

IV. Transfer, Consolidation, Reconstitution or Discontinuance of a Graduate Degree Program .... 37

V. Suspension of Admission to a Graduate Degree Program ...................................................... 39

VI. Name Change of a Graduate Degree Program ....................................................................... 41

Index ................................................................................................................................... 43

2 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

The Guide to Graduate Program Approval is designed to assist departments in preparing proposals for

new programs and certificates and revising existing program requirements. It describes the basic

information required for Senate and administrative review agencies, provides an overview of the review

processes, and includes policies and guidelines for interdepartmental and self-supporting programs and

graduate-level certificates.

PART ONE: GRADUATE COUNCIL AND THE GRADUATE DIVISION

Graduate Council

The Graduate Council is a standing committee of the University of California Academic Senate, Los

Angeles Division. In keeping with the University’s commitment to the principles of shared governance,

the Council is responsible for establishing policy and standards for graduate education at UCLA; for

approving, reviewing and monitoring graduate degree programs; and for making recommendations

regarding fellowships and assistantships.

Committee on Degree Programs

The Committee on Degree Programs (CDP) is a subcommittee of the Graduate Council. It acts on

proposals for changes in degree requirements, program modifications, course approvals, appeals from

students and exceptions for service on Master's and doctoral committees. The CDP considers and makes

recommendations on graduate education policies, admissions standards and enrollment planning.

Graduate Division

The UCLA Graduate Division is the academic unit that admits and awards degrees to students in all

master’s, doctoral and professional degree programs except the MD, DDS, JD and LLM. It is responsible

for administering Academic Senate and campus regulations and policies related to graduate students

and degree programs. The Division oversees graduate recruitment and admissions, including the

recruitment of a diverse student body, as well as fellowships, teaching and research assistantships and

other graduate student support, and maintenance of high quality standards in all UCLA graduate

programs. The Dean of the Graduate Division also serves as Vice Provost of Graduate Education, with

campus-wide responsibility.

Delegation

The Graduate Council delegates authority to approve courses (new, revised, and deletions) and minor

changes in graduate program requirements to the Graduate Division. New courses proposed for new

graduate programs, as well as substantive or large-scale revisions to programs requirements, are

reviewed by the Committee on Degree Programs and/or the Graduate Council. The full text of the

delegated authority can be found here:

http://www.senate.ucla.edu/committees/gc/documents/GraduateCouncil_DelegationofAuthority_Upda

tedFall2012.pdf.

3 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART TWO: ONLINE RESOURCES

Academic Calendar http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/calendar/

Academic Planning and Budget http://www.apb.ucla.edu/

Academic Senate Compendium

http://ucop.edu/academic-planning-programs-

coordination/_files/documents/compendium_jan2011.pdf

Academic Senate Regulations (UCLA) http://www.senate.ucla.edu/manual/

Academic Senate Regulations

(Systemwide)

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/manual/

Analysis & Information Management http://www.aim.ucla.edu/home.asp

Chicago Manual of Style http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html

Coordinating Committee on Graduate

Affairs

http://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/committees/ccga/

Graduate Council Members http://www.senate.ucla.edu/committees/gc/default.htm

Graduate Division http://www.grad.ucla.edu

Procedural Manual for the Review of

Proposals for Academic Programs and

Units

http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/facultystaff/AcadProgApprov

Procedures.pdf

Program Requirements for UCLA

Graduate Degrees

http://www.grad.ucla.edu/gasaa/library/pgmrqintro.htm

Schedule of Classes http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/

Senate Office http://www.senate.ucla.edu/

WASC Guidelines http://www.wascsenior.org/

4 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART THREE: CHANGING EXISTING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

The Graduate Division solicits program change requests in early January with an April 1 deadline. Late

requests for program changes are considered only in extraordinary circumstances. Minor changes are

reviewed by the Graduate Division under delegated authority. Major changes are reviewed by the

Committee on Degree Programs and, in some cases, by the Graduate Council as a whole.

To change existing program requirements, the chair or vice-chair of the department submits the

following electronically to the Graduate Division:

• Program Requirements Update Request Form signed by the chair

• Proposed text with original and amended copy with changes tracked (see sample)

I. Program Requirements Update Form

The proposal must have all of the following information. The Graduate Division will return a proposal to

the department for additional information if any of the items listed below are missing.

1. The program being changed.

2. Summary of the specific changes requested.

3. Rationale for the changes. If the proposal is in response to a program review recommendation,

this should be stated.

4. Indication of the overall impact of the changes on the department (e.g., what portion of the

students are affected, collateral impacts on other students or programs)

5. If the change affects other departments’ programs, indicate that those departments have been

contacted and informed of the change. Include a memo from the Chair or his/her designee

affirming that the affected department has no objections to the changes and, if applicable, can

accommodate the change.

6. Summary of the full faculty vote on the proposed changes (date, number eligible, number in

favor, number against, number of abstentions) and any student input for major changes to the

program. A Faculty Executive Committee vote may be required.

7. List of any previously approved course actions (deletions, additions, re-numbering) that impact

the text of the program requirements.

8. The required units for master’s students to advance to candidacy

9. The proposed effective academic year for the changes, and whether students matriculating prior

to that year may opt for the new requirements.

10. The name, title, e-mail address and telephone number of the department contact(s) for

consultation regarding the proposal.

II. Preparing the Proposed Text

The Graduate Division publishes Program Requirements for UCLA Graduate Degrees

(http://www.grad.ucla.edu/gasaa/library/pgmrqintro.htm

). It is the official, Graduate Council-approved

description of program requirements for all graduate and professional degreed. It is updated and

5 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

published annually. Students are subject to the degree requirements as published for their program in

the year in which they matriculate. In preparing text to indicate updates of changes, use the text from

this site as the base document.

1. In the pull-down menu, select the program whose requirements are to be changed.

2. Copy the entire current-year program requirements text into a Word document.

3. Use Track Changes to indicate changes in the text while preserving the original copy. Use the

“Options” tab and select “Strikethrough” for deletions and “Underline” for insertions.

4. The Graduate Division edits the text for consistency and style. To assist with editing, follow

these guidelines:

a. Section headings and their arrangement are standardized for programs. Do not change

section headings.

b. The text in the following sections is standardized. Do not change the text in these sections:

• Graduate Degrees

• Doctoral Advancement to Candidacy

• Doctoral Dissertation

• Final Oral Examination

• University Policy (under Termination of Graduate Study and Appeal of Termination)

5. Prepare text in accordance with the Chicago Manual of Style

6. Use the third person such as “students” rather than “he” or “she”

7. Do not use course titles with listing course numbers, e.g., use “Botany 220” not “Botany 220

Plant Life.”

8. When including numbers in text, note that numbers one through nine are spelled out and

number 10 and higher are designated by numerals.

9. Submit track changes in Word, not PDF.

III. Deadline to Submit Program Changes

E-mail the proposal, the proposed text, and attachments to academicser[email protected] with

“[Your program] Program Changes” as the subject. The deadline to accept program changes is April 1

for the following academic year. Late requests for program changes are considered only in

extraordinary circumstances. Please adhere to the deadline.

6 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

IV. Sample Showing Tracked Changes

In preparing text to indicate updates or changes, use the text from this site as the base document.

http://www.grad.ucla.edu/gasaa/library/pgmrqintro.htm

. Use Track Changes to indicate changes in the

text while preserving the original copy. Use strikeout for deletions and underline for insertions.

Applicable only to students admitted during the 2012 3 - 2013 4 academic year

Zoology

College of Letters and Science

Graduate Degrees

The Department of Zoology offers the Master of Science (M.S.) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degrees in

Zoology.

Admission

Program Name

Zoology

Address

10 Animal Hall

Box 95555

Los Angeles, CA 90095-7246

Phone

(310) 825-5555

[email protected]

Leading to the degree of

M.S., Ph.D.

Admission Limited to

Fall

Deadline to apply

December 15

January 1

GRE (General and/or Subject)

GRE: General

Letters of Recommendation

3 Three, from professors, supervisors, or others who may provide an evaluation of the applicant's

accomplishments or potential in research, teaching, and related scholarly activities.

Other Requirements

In addition to the University's minimum requirements and those listed above, all applicants are expected to

submit a statement of purpose.

The department encourages applications from students in all areas of science, but expects successful

applicants to have or to acquire a background comparable to the requirements for the bachelor's degree in

biology at UCLA. A background in chemistry, physics, and mathematics is desirable. Deficiencies in these or

other subjects should be made up at the earliest opportunity. Undergraduates who are prospective applicants

should remedy their deficiencies by preparatory study at an appropriate inistituion.

Master's Degree

Advising

The departmental graduate counselor is available for general and specific information about the degree

program. Students are assigned an adviser upon admission to the program.

7 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART FOUR: PROPOSE A NEW GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM

All new graduate degree programs require departmental, faculty executive committee, Graduate

Council, and system-wide review. The Graduate Council’s policy analyst should be called upon for

preliminary review of the proposal to ensure its readiness. The completed proposal with all required

components is referred to the Graduate Council’s Committee on Degree Programs, and undergoes

review by both an ad hoc subgroup or lead reviewer and the full committee before being recommended

to the Graduate Council for approval. The Graduate Council consults with the Council on Planning and

Budget (which requires analysis by Academic Planning and Budget for its assessment), the Graduate

Division, and the Registrar’s Office and incorporates their comments into its review of all proposals.

The Committee on Degree Programs and/or the Graduate Council will request the principal author(s) of

the document attend one or more of its meetings to present the proposal to the membership.

Preliminary meetings may have been called by representatives of the Committee on Degree Programs or

the Graduate Council to clarify information or request additional information prior to the formal

submission of the proposal.

After being approved by the Graduate Council and upon receipt of the Executive Vice Chancellor’s

endorsement letter, the proposal is forwarded to the UC Academic Senate’s Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA) and the UC Office of the President (UCOP) for further review. The CCGA

conducts a more intensive review, including the designation of a lead reviewer among the CCGA

membership who also consults with external reviewers as mandated by the UC Compendium.

Additionally all proposals must be accompanied by the California Postsecondary Education Commission

(CPEC) Summary Form,

which is used by UCOP for strategic planning purposes. Additionally the

Western Associate of Schools and Colleges (WASC) may require separate review depending on the scope

and structure of the proposed program. Details on WASC review can be found on page 15. Following

CCGA approval, the proposal is routed to UCOP, which transmits approval of the new program to the

UCLA Executive Vice Chancellor, who then notifies relevant campus agencies.

Given the number of stages in the review process and the number of review agencies, approving a new

degree program may require a substantial amount of time (one to two years). Proposed programs

cannot be advertised, marketed, or referenced by a Program until the notification of final approval from

the Office of the President to the UCLA Chancellor has been received by the Academic Senate.

Preparation for Proposing a New Graduate Degree Program

When starting to plan for a new graduate degree program, consider the following:

5-Year Planning Perspective

The campus solicits input from the faculty and administration regarding proposed plans with a five-year

horizon. The Five-Year Planning Perspective serves several purposes. It provides the information that

UC uses for systemwide long-range planning. It is also a tool that enables the ten UC campuses to keep

one other apprised of their academic plans, and so can help identify both synergies and potentially

duplicative efforts. The cognizant dean should provide a brief description of the planned program to the

EVC/Provost as early as possible, and certainly by the time the proposal is submitted to the Academic

Senate for its review.

As of November 2011, CPEC was decommissioned. However, the form continues to be of administrative use.

8 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Resource Analysis

A comprehensive analysis of the resource requirements and enrollments for the new program is a

required element of the proposal. The format for the analysis is provided in Section 6. If new resources

are required, the Office of Academic Planning and Budget (APB) should be contacted for assistance with

the budget. The Office of Analysis and Information Management (AIM) should be consulted for

information and assistance with enrollment planning.

Decanal Support

As soon as possible, the proposal, including the complete resource analysis and enrollment plan, should

be sent to the Dean(s) of the appropriate School(s) or College. The Dean(s)' evaluation of the proposal,

including an indication of the level of support or priority for the proposed program, must be attached to

the proposal as an appendix.

Library Support

The proposal should also be sent to the University Librarian. The Librarian reviews the immediate and

long-range Library resource requirements and their consequences for planned Library development.

This response must also be attached as an appendix.

Academic Senate

Questions concerning graduate degree proposals should be directed to the Graduate Council Policy

Analyst at 310-825-1162.

9 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART FIVE: ORGANIZATION OF NEW PROGRAM PROPOSAL

I. Sample Cover Page

The proposal will include a cover letter with an outline and departmental vote and will be address the

Chair of the Graduate Council.

(Degree) Program in (Degree Name)

To be offered by: (Department or proposed interdepartmental degree committee)

SUBMITTED BY: (PROPOSAL AUTHORS NAMES AND TITLES)

DATE SUBMITTED TO GRADUATE COUNCIL: (DATE)

Table of Contents

PAGE

Section 1. Introduction #

Section 2. Program Description #

Section 3. Projected Need #

Section 4. Teaching Staff #

Section 5. Courses #

Section 6. Resource Requirements #

Section 7. Fee Structure #

Section 8. Graduate Student Support #

Section 9 Professional Development #

Section 10. Changes in Senate Regulations #

Section 11. Abstract (New Degree Designations Only) #

Section 12. Substantive Change Review (WASC) #

Appendices

APPENDIX A: CPEC Summary (California Postsecondary Education Commission)

APPENDIX B: Draft Copy of Program Requirements

APPENDIX C: Decanal Endorsement(s)

APPENDIX D: Faculty Executive Committee Endorsement

APPENDIX E: Academic Planning and Budget Resource Analysis

APPENDIX F: University Librarian Endorsement

APPENDIX G: Support Letters from Peer Programs (UC campuses and other)

APPENDIX H: Draft Bylaws (For IDP Proposals)

APPENDIX I: Departmental Letters of Commitment (For IDP Proposals)

10 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

II. Proposal Sections

Section 1. Introduction

Prepare an introductory statement setting forth the following:

1. Aims and objectives of the program and its distinctive features.

2. Historical development of the field and historical development of the departmental strength (or

campus strength, if proposing an IDP) in the field.

3. Timetable for development of the program. (See also Section 6 regarding resource

requirements and enrollment plans.)

4. Relationship of the proposed program to existing programs on campus and to the Campus

Academic Plan. Evidence of high campus priority. If program is not in the Five-Year Academic

Plan for the campus, the plan must be submitted immediately to the Office of the President.

5. Interrelationship of the program with other University of California programs. Differences from

other similar programs within the University and in other California institutions, if applicable.

Note whether any similar programs are in development on other campuses (see 5-Year

Academic Plans posted on the UC website). Any possibility of cooperation or competition with

other extant or nascent programs within the University should be discussed. Append an

appropriate mix of letters of evaluation from chairs of departments in related fields from the UC

system and outside. Discuss the effect of the proposed program on undergraduate programs

offered by the sponsoring department(s).

6. Department or group that will administer the program.

7. Plan for evaluation of the program by the offering department(s) and campus.

8. For IDP proposals, evidence that the different participating disciplines contribute to the total

program in such a way that the student cannot achieve the necessary knowledge without

substantial study in two or more established departments.

Section 2. Program Description

Provide a detailed statement of requirements for the program including the following (omit any

item which is not an element of the program):

1. Undergraduate preparation for admission.

2. Foreign language requirement. (For the PhD degree, briefly justify the requirement or why none

is required.)

3. Program of study

a. Specific fields of emphasis.

b. Plans (e.g. Masters I and/or II).

c. Unit requirements.

d. Required and recommended courses, including teaching requirements, field experience

and/or internships.

e. When a degree program must have licensing or certification, the requirements of the

agency or agencies involved should be listed in the proposal, especially the courses need to

satisfy such requirements.

11 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

4. Field examinations and/or other pre-qualifying examinations.

5. Qualifying examinations, written and oral.

6. Thesis and/or dissertation.

7. Final examination. For PhD degrees, state whether the final defense is required by the

department or IDP or it is optional, to be determined by the dissertation committee.

8. Explanation of special requirements over and above University minimum requirements.

9. Relationship between the master's and doctor's programs.

10. Sample degree program.

11. Normative time from matriculation to degree, and how this compares with similar degrees

offered by UCLA and by peer institutions. (Assume student has no deficiencies and is full-time.)

Also, specify the normative lengths of time for pre-candidacy and candidacy periods. Indicate

the policies and/or incentives that will ensure that students make timely progress toward

degree completion in the proposed program.

Section 3. Projected Need

Describe the projected need for the new program, setting forth the following. Statistics or other

detailed documentation of need or demand for the program should be provided.

1. Student demand for program.

2. Opportunities for placement of graduates. Proposal reviewers will expect detailed and

convincing evidence of career prospects and job market needs, especially for programs in

graduate fields now well-represented among UC campuses and other California universities.

What recent assessments of current job opportunities and future growth can be provided to

demonstrate a strong market for graduates of this program?

3. Importance to the discipline.

4. Ways in which the program will meet the needs of society.

5. Relationship of the program to research and/or professional interests of the faculty.

6. Program differentiation. How will the proposed program distinguish itself from existing UC and

other California university programs?

Section 4. Teaching Staff

Provide information about present teaching staff and immediately pending appointments. This

should include a list of teaching staff members, their ranks, their highest degree and other

professional qualifications, and citations for no more than five recent publications each. Data

concerning staff should be limited to information pertinent to the Committee's evaluation of their

qualifications to teach in the program.

Proposals for IDPs must include

1. Letters of commitment, in the approved Graduate Council format, from the departments that

are be central to the implementation and operation of the program. Assistance in identifying

the appropriate departments may be obtained from the Graduate Council Analyst.

12 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

2. A proposed organizational structure that assures full participation in decisions concerning any

changes in the program and its administration. Include the recommended membership of the

faculty advisory committee. This committee is appointed by the Dean of the IDP’s respective

School or Division, acting for the Graduate Council.

3. Sources of available teaching assistantship, research assistantship and fellowship support for

students.

Section 5. Courses

Provide a list of existing and proposed courses and their instructors, including supporting courses in

related fields. The Program Degree Requirement copy should be appended. Give the relationship of

these courses to specific fields of emphasis and future plans. Describe how new courses will be

staffed, given existing instructional workloads.

If the program includes courses and faculty participation from related fields or other departments,

letters of endorsement should be included from those responsible for approving such cooperative

arrangements, typically the department chairs. (For IDP proposals, this information will be included

in the letters of support.)

Section 6. Resource Requirements and Enrollment Plan

1. Explain the intended method of funding this program for the first five years, including the fund

sources. If no new resources are required, it is assumed that some internal reallocation will

occur. Explain how this is to be accomplished, indicating the units and budgets affected. If new

resources are required, estimate the additional costs of the program by year for the first five

years, and indicate how those additional costs will be covered. The following categories should

be included, as applicable, in presenting this analysis:

a. FTE faculty (ladder and non-ladder)

b. Staff FTE

c. Library acquisitions

d. Computing costs

e. Instructional equipment

f. Space and other capital facilities

g. Other operating costs

Please note that graduate student support costs should be described in Section 8.

2. Project the enrollments, by year and student level, for the first five years. Describe the

relationship between these projections and your most recent graduate enrollment projections

for the campus. Explain how the projected enrollments impact or follow from shifts in

undergraduate enrollments in the department or IDP. If enrollment quotas have been

established for the program(s) affected by this proposal, state which program(s) will have their

enrollments reduced in order to accommodate the proposed program.

Section 7. Fee Structure

If the new program is proposing Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition (PDST), explain the fee

structure. In particular, please be aware of the following:

• PDST fees are approved annually by The Regents. While the approval cycle varies by year,

the PDST process starts up to one year in advance of when the fee is charged.

13 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

• The process to implement a PDST involves an application process that is managed on the

campus by the Office of Academic Planning and Budget.

• The UCOP application for a new PDST includes information regarding (but not limited

to): total program cost (inclusive of campus-based fees), comparisons to similar programs

at public and private universities, student debt load, starting salary at graduation, diversity,

student return to aid, consultation with faculty and students.

• Departments should work with the Office of Academic Planning and Budget early in the

planning stages to determine the amount of proposed professional degree supplemental

tuition and to address the questions posed in the submission process overseen by the Office

of the President for presentation to The Regents.

Self-supporting degree programs must meet at least one of the following criteria:

1. Serve a non-traditional student population such as full-time employees, mid-career

professionals, international students, and/or students supported by their employers.

2. The program is offered through an alternative mode of delivery, such as online

instructions or a hybrid model.

3. Be alternatively scheduled in the evening, weekends and summers.

4. Be offered in an alternative location (off-campus).

Proposed self-supporting degrees require the completion of a UC Office of the President income

statement forecast. A pro-forma allocation of School/Division and campus overhead is part of the

income statement. The overhead to be included in the UCOP forecast is determined by the Office of

Academic Planning and Budget using UC audited financial statements and information regarding the

proposed program.

For consideration by the appropriate committee(s) of the Academic Senate, self-supporting degree

programs require an opinion letter from the Associate Vice Chancellor of Academic Planning and

Budget. This financial opinion letter should be included in the submission to the Academic Senate.

The review by the UCLA Academic Senate may take one year or longer. After the review by the

UCLA Academic Senate, proposed new self-supporting degree program proposals are forwarded to

the Office of the President for review by the Coordinating Council on Graduate Affairs

(CCGA). Review by the CCGA may take one year or longer.

Departments should work with the Office of Academic Planning and Budget early in the planning

stages to learn more about the financial aspects of a self-supporting degree program.

Section 8. Graduate Student Support

All new proposals should include detailed plans for providing sufficient, competitive graduate

student support. Describe the expected level and types (fellowship, teaching and/or research

assistantships) of support for students throughout their course of study and the expected sources of

that support, both extramural and campus-based. As applicable for the field, include information on

extramural research and training grants, foundation grants, and other current and potential

extramural fund sources. Include information on existing internal fellowship and other institutional

support that would be available. Describe current and planned fundraising initiatives to generate

support for students in the proposed program.

14 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

How many teaching assistantships will be available to the program? Will resources for them be

provided through approved enrollment growth, reallocation, or a combination? How will

reallocation affect support in existing programs?

Section 9. Professional Development

Describe how the program will provide professional and career development skills and information.

How will the department (or IDP) and prepare its students for postgraduate opportunities that may

be academic or nonacademic?

Section 10. Changes in Senate Regulations

Assistance with this section can be obtained from the Graduate Council Analyst (310-825-1162).

1. The proposal should state clearly whether or not any changes in Senate regulations at the

Divisional level or in the Senate Assembly will be required. If so, the complete text of the

proposed amendments or new Regulations should accompany the proposal.

2. A proposal for a new graduate degree or certificate must be accompanied by

a. A draft of the enabling legislation for the Los Angeles Division of the Academic Senate, and

b. For the Regents' approval by Resolution, the title and letter abbreviation for the new degree

should be clearly indicated in the proposal.

Section 11. Abstract

This section only applies to a proposal for a new program leading to a new degree designation, one

not already authorized by the Regents to be offered on the UCLA campus and for which enabling

legislation must be included under Section 7 (cf. L.A. Division By-Law 65.2 (B)(4), rev. November 11,

1986).

The abstract must be a statement of the program proposal in summary form, section-by-section, for

distribution with the Call to a meeting of the Legislative Assembly of the Academic Senate, Los

Angeles Division. The full text of the proposal will be available to Senate members for reference in

the Academic Senate Office.

Section 12. WASC Substantive Change Review

Per the Western Association of Schools and Colleges’ (WASC) Substantive Change Manual a

“substantive change” at an accredited institution is defined as one that “may significantly affect an

institution’s quality, objectives, scope, or control.” In such situations, WASC may require a

Committee and/or Commission Review of the proposed program before it can be approved by

WASC and the Office of the President. The following types of changes are considered substantive,

categorized by the level of review required to implement the change:

A WASC Committee Review requires review and approval by a panel of the Substantive Change

Committee prior to approval by the Commission. These changes include

1. New Degree Programs (i.e., new degree designations)

2. New off-campus locations (more than 25 miles from the main campus)

3. New Distance or Correspondence Education Programs (50% or more of a degree program).

15 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

A WASC Committee and Commission Review (also referred to as Structural Change) is a more

complex change that requires review by a panel of the Substantive Change Committee, a site visit

(unless waived), and review by a panel of the Structural Change Committee of the Commission, prior

to being ratified by the Commission. These include:

1. Degree program offerings at a new degree level

2. A change in mission, ownership or control

3. A joint degree.

Determining the type of change is very important, as it is the basis for how the University will

navigate the substantive change process. Departments are encouraged to contact the UCLA WASC

Compliance Office for guidance (see http://www.wasc.ucla.edu/

for contact information). More

information about the substantive change review process is available at:

http://www.wascsenior.org/

III. Required Appendices

APPENDIX A: CPEC (California Postsecondary Education Commission)

The following information is required by the UC Office of the President. This questionnaire is to be

completed by sponsoring faculty (department or interdepartmental committee) in the indicated

format using as much space as needed and attached to the full proposal. The questionnaire will be

used by Systemwide Administration to prepare a report to CPEC.

1. Name of Program: _____________________________________________

2. Campus: UCLA

3. Degree/Certificate: ____________________________________________

(The certificate category referred to includes all organized programs which award certificates for

academic achievement. This includes professional certificate programs. Skills programs which

are designed specifically for state licensing purposes need not be reported.)

4. CIP Classification (to be completed by Office of the President):

5. Date to be started: Proposed Implementation Date/Quarter:

6. Modification of existing program, identify that program and explain changes. (This means new

programs that have roots in existing programs--which may or may not be degree programs.)

7. Purpose (academic or professional training), distinctive features and justification. How does this

program differ from others, if any offered in California? The document issued by CPEC titled

CPEC was disestablished as of November 2011; however, the form is still collected for administrative purposes.

16 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

"Inventory of Academic and Occupational Programs in California Colleges and Universities" is in

the Graduate Council Office (extension 310-825-1162).

The new program must be compared with similar programs listed in the inventory. A list of

programs in the State of California is available at:

www.cpec.ca.gov/collegeguide/programsearch.asp

8. Type(s) of students to be served.

9. If program is not in current campus academic plan, give reason for starting program now.

10. If program requires approval of a licensure board, what is the status of such approval?

11. Please list distinctive features of the program having the character of credit for experience,

internships, lab requirements, etc.

12. List all new courses required:

List Department, Course Number, Course Title, and Hours/Week Lecture & Lab

13. List all other required courses:

List Department, Course Number, Course Title, and Hours/Week Lecture & Lab

14. List UC campus and other California institutions, public or private, which now offer or plan to

offer this program or closely related programs. (The current requirement is that these programs

be listed. What is of concern is possible duplication. Proposal sponsors should be aware of this

and give careful attention to the program justification in #6.)

15. List any related program offered by the proposing institution and explain relationship.

16. Summarize employment prospects for graduates of the proposed program. Give results of job

market survey if such have been made. (This is aimed at graduate or undergraduate

professional programs.)

17. Give estimated new and total enrollment for the first five years and state basis for estimate.

18. Give estimates of the additional cost of the program by year for five years in each of the

following categories:

a. FTE Faculty

b. Library Acquisitions

c. Computing

d. Other Facilities

e. Equipment

Provide brief explanation of any of the costs where necessary.

(The additional resources, if any, required by the proposed program must be included even if

they can be supplied by campus reallocation.)

17 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

19. How and by what agencies will the program be evaluated? (This refers to the campus' and

professional review procedures.)

APPENDIX B: Proposed Program Requirements for the Graduate Division Publication

Attach a draft of the Program Requirements that will be published by the Graduate Division on its

website http://www.grad.ucla.edu/gasaa/library/pgmrqintro.htm

. The program requirements listed

on this website are the official, Graduate Council-approved outline of program requirements for all

graduate and professional degree programs offered through the Graduate Division. It is updated

and published annually. Students are subject to the degree requirements as published for their

program for the year in which they matriculate, unless subsequent revisions expressly allow

students to opt into the revised requirements. There is a specific format and items of information

required. For samples see the Program Requirement website or contact

[email protected].

APPENDIX C: Decanal Endorsement(s)

Attach the Dean(s)' memo of evaluation and support of the proposal.

APPENDIX D: Faculty Executive Committee Endorsement

Attach the College or Schools’ memo of evaluation and support of the proposal, including the vote.

APPENDIX E: Academic Planning and Budget Resource Analysis

Attach Academic Planning and Budget’s analysis of the proposal.

APPENDIX F: University Librarian Endorsement

Attach the University Librarian’s comments on the proposal.

APPENDIX G: Support Letters from Peer Programs

Attach memos of support from peer programs at other UC campuses.

APPENDIX H: Draft Bylaws (For IDP Proposals)

Bylaws are required for departments and IDPs. For examples of bylaws, see

http://www.senate.ucla.edu/FormsDocs/bylaws/DeptBylaws/dept_bylaws.htm

APPENDIX I: Departmental Commitments (For IDP Proposals)

Attach departmental memos of support using the format described in Part VII.

18 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART SIX: POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AND GUIDELINES

I. Departmental Letters of Commitment for IDPs

A. Required Information

The Graduate Council affirms its responsibility for ensuring the quality of interdepartmental

graduate degree programs (IDPs). This responsibility extends beyond the initial review for approval,

and is considered to be particularly relevant at the time of the eight-year Council review.

The Council cannot assume that a letter from the chair of a department by itself constitutes a

commitment in the sense the Council requires. A letter from the Chair may not bind the

department in perpetuity, and in any case, the department in question may wish to periodically

review its commitments to interdepartmental programs. Accordingly, the Council requires a

statement from each participating department, according to the following guidelines, at the time a

new interdepartmental program is proposed, and at each subsequent eight-year review. Failure to

secure such commitments can only be construed as an indication of withdrawal of support by

participating departments, and places the future of the interdepartmental program in grave doubt;

it may serve as grounds for suspension of the degree program.

It is the responsibility of the proposing or guiding committee of an interdepartmental program to

secure the statements of commitment from participating departments. Such statements must be

obtained from each department that will carry a significant share of the instructional burden or

otherwise make significant contributions to the program. These statements should be in the form of

letters to the Chair of the Graduate Council.

Interdepartmental degree programs are approved with the understanding that a unique educational

experience is thereby created, drawing upon the resources of the several participating departments.

Council approval is granted with the understanding of the existence and extent of those

departmental commitments. A statement commitment must include at least the following

information.

1. The department chair must state that the degree proposal or degree program has been

discussed with the entire faculty of the department (not just those who must participate), and

that the precise nature of the departmental commitment has been clearly spelled out.

2. The letter must specify the exact nature of the commitment to the program. Such commitment

may be include:

a. Space: where, how much, subject to what conditions?

b. Support personnel: who or what classifications, how many or what percent time, or how

many FTEs?

c. Academic staff: who or what level(s) and series, how many FTEs?

d. Money: how much, what restrictions?

e. Courses offered: which courses, any enrollment limits, any special courses for this program.

Are currently offered courses being made available to students in this program? Have the

courses already been approved or is approval pending? Who will teach the courses, and

what provisions will be made should the currently assigned instructor be unable to teach

that course in the future?

19 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

f. Graduate student support: availability of fellowships, teaching and research assistantships

to students enrolled in the proposed program

g. Graduate student mentoring: faculty availability and commitment to mentoring and advising

students enrolled in the program: A list of faculty who have agreed to serve as thesis and

dissertation committee chairs In the proposed program should be included, as evidence that

the Chair is aware of their interest and commitments.

It is very important that every eight years, the department chair provide all the information

necessary to assure the Council that the department’s faculty understand and concur in the

commitments made on its behalf.

3. The Chair's letter must indicate that the faculty of the department was given an opportunity to

vote on whether or not the department should participate in the program and whether or not it

should make the commitments outlined in the chair's letter. The letter must state the outcome

of that vote: 1) Number of votes in favor of the proposal; 2) Number of votes against; 3)

Number of abstentions; and 4) Total number of faculty eligible to vote. The letter must also

state that those dissenting in the vote were invited to state their opposition in the form of a

minority report to the Council. The report will be kept confidential and anonymous if the

authors so desire; the chair must state this option at the time an invitation to file a minority

report is extended.

B. Format for Letters of Commitment for IDPs

Use the following format for departmental letters of support for interdepartmental degree

programs. While the wording does not need to not follow this model exactly, each of the points

listed here should be covered in such a manner as to provide a clear picture of the extent of the

department's commitment to the program.

Statement of Department Support for Program

The Department of (Department Name) at its meeting on (date) voted to support and

participate in the Interdepartmental Graduate Program in (Program Name) leading to the

(Degree Types) degree(s) as follows: number of votes in favor, number of votes against, number

of abstentions, and total number of faculty eligible to vote.

Extent of Departmental Commitment to the Program

The Department has discussed and agreed upon the following aspects of its commitment to the

program. This commitment is made for a period of at least eight years. It is undertaken on the

understanding that the Department will be represented on the Committee to Administer the

Interdepartmental Degree Program during this period and that the Department thereafter will

reconsider the extent of its commitment in accordance with the procedures implied in this

format.

1. The Department will staff, on a continuing basis, those courses that are included in the

program, and will recruit replacement faculty as needed to fulfill this responsibility. The

Department will contribute to the administration of the program through appointment of

one of its members to the Interdepartmental Committee.

2. The Department will accommodate increased enrollment in its course that may result from

participation in the program as follows. (Please be as specific as possible and elaborate if

20 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

needed; if none of the alternatives below seem approximately applicable, provide your own

statement.)

a. The Department will accommodate any level of increased enrollment in its courses that

may result given the presently projected number of degree candidates in the program.

b. The Department will, if needed, increase the frequency with which the relevant courses

are offered.

c. The Department can in general accommodate students from the program only up to a

maximum number of ___ each time one of the relevant courses is offered.

d. The Department will make every reasonable effort to adjust the scheduling of its

courses in order to ensure that courses involved in the program are offered as needed.

3. List the Department members that belong to the core faculty on which the operation of the

interdepartmental program depend for instruction and/or student advising. The

Department should make an effort to recruit faculty with similar qualifications for

leadership roles in the program should one of these members retire or leave UCLA within

the next eight years. (Please include a summary--two pages at the most--of curricula vitae

of core faculty, showing major publications of the last five years.)

4. The Department will provide support in the form of (minimum FTE number) Teaching

Assistantships to students enrolled in the program. This commitment is made with the

understanding that the duties of any students thus appointed will be performed entirely

within the Department's teaching program and that all particular assignments to such duties

are made at the sole discretion of the Department Chairman or Department member

designated by him/her.

5. The Department will provide graduate students working with faculty in the department with

access to research assistantships, fellowships, and other forms of support.

6. The Department will make available to students enrolled in the program departmental

resources in the form of laboratory space, office or carrel space, and equipment. (Please

specify relevant categories of such resource support and any limitations on utilization by

students in the interdepartmental program that do not apply to students in the

Department's own programs.)

7. The Department will contribute administrative assistant services and office space for filing,

etc., in connection with the program. (Please indicate specifically how much administrative

assistance the interdepartmental Committee can depend on receiving on a regular basis--

e.g., "one half-time administrative assistant.")

Departmental Support of Faculty Participation (Comment on all sections)

1. Release time will be provided, if necessary, for any faculty member whose duties connected

with the administration of the interdepartmental program (e.g., as its Chair) preclude

carrying his/her full-time teaching load in the Department.

2. The service of faculty members in the interdepartmental program will receive full

recognition, for purposes of merit increases or promotions as equivalent to service carried

out within the Department itself.

3. Budgetary implications:

21 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

a. The duties of Department members in connection with the program will not occasion

Departmental requests for additional budgetary support from University sources.

b. The Department will require additional budgetary support from University or extramural

sources in the event that activities connected with the program require a reduction of

the departmental duties of our members as follows. (Please describe: e.g., "release

time for periods in excess of x quarters can be provided only in so far as the department

is provided [specify needs] through [specify decanal or other campus resources].")

Course Offerings

1. The following courses listed by the Interdepartmental Degree Program are offered by our

department on a regular basis every year: (List course number, course title, and whether it

will be “required” or “elective”)

Course Number

Course Title

Required/Elective

2. The following courses listed by the program are offered by our Department on an

intermittent basis: (List course number, course title, and whether it will be “required” or

“elective”)

Course Number

Course Title

Required/Elective

Faculty Participation

1. (Faculty Member’s Name) a tenured member of our faculty, has been directly involved in

the development of the program as a member of the planning committee, and will be an

active participant in the program after its approval. His/her fields of expertise are: (List

fields of expertise).

2. Other faculty members who have expressed a firm interest in participating actively in the

program are: (List name, rank and fields of interest, and whether they will chair thesis and/or

dissertation committees).

3. Additionally, the following members of our department regularly give courses in fields

related to the program. (List name, rank and fields of interest.)

II. Eligible Master’s and Doctoral Committee Lists for IDPs

The three committee members from the student’s “department” must be selected from a list of faculty

members who actively participate in the program. This list will be prepared by the chair of the IDP

committee and submitted to the Graduate Division at the beginning of each fall term.

III. Procedural Guidelines for the Appointment of IDP Chairs and Faculty

Administrative Committees

The Graduate Council approved the following guidelines May 11, 2012:

22 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Interdepartmental Degree Programs (IDP) and Free-Standing minors (FSM) are governed by Faculty

Administrative Committees appointed by the respective reporting academic dean. The membership and

chair of the committees are reported to the Graduate and Undergraduate Councils.

Timeline

February 1

Graduate and Undergraduate Council chairs inform reporting deans of the need to

confirm upcoming academic year appointments for IDP chair appointments and

faculty administrative committee members.

April 1

Reminder sent to deans

May 1

All responses due from deans to Graduate and Undergraduate Council chairs

May 15

Graduate and Undergraduate Council chairs inform Vice Provosts for

Undergraduate and Graduate Education and University Registrar of the confirmed

appointments.

IDP Chair Appointments

An IDP Chair is a faculty member who serves as the academic leader and administrative head of an

interdepartmental degree program and, as such, is responsible to the division/school in which the IDP is

housed. The IDP Chair holds fiduciary responsibilities for the program and reports on its financial status

at the end of each academic year, and will normally serve a three- to five-year term. The scope of each

chair’s duties depends upon the size and nature of the IDP. Specific responsibilities are described in the

letter of appointment.

IDP/FSM FAC Appointments

For any teaching responsibilities in an IDP/FSM or other commitments to the IDP/FSM, a formal

agreement is to be made among the faculty member, the chair of the IDP/FSM, the chair(s) of the

department(s) in which the faculty member’s FTE resides, the reporting Dean of the IDP/FSM, and the

reporting Dean of the faculty member’s home department(s) if different from the reporting Dean of the

IDP/FSM. The agreement should articulate the number of courses the faculty member will teach and the

approximate percentage of time to be devoted to teaching, advising, administrative, and/or committee

assignments in each unit. Any subsequent renegotiation of that agreement should include the full

participation of all individuals listed above.

FAC Responsibilities

Responsibilities of the Faculty Administrative Committee include

• Participation in planning the program and course offerings and overseeing all curricular matters,

including recommending new courses and changes in the curriculum

• Participation in student recruitment, admissions, and advising

• Working together constructively to maintain a strong and viable program and a climate that is

hospitable to creativity and innovation

• Advocating for the program

• Recommending individuals for the next year’s FAC to the cognizant Dean.

23 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

IV. Guidelines for Interdisciplinary Certificates for Matriculated Graduate

Students

The following guidelines for Interdisciplinary Certificates were approved by the Graduate Council

December 4, 2009.

UCLA offers a number of certificate programs that are interdisciplinary in nature and draw upon the

strengths of the faculty and their research specializations. Certificate programs are designed to provide

graduate students with additional advanced training in emerging fields of research and knowledge. The

requirements for a certificate vary by program, but must adhere to general guidelines endorsed by the

Graduate Council.

Certificates offering direct admission at the graduate-level (“Senate-Regulated Certificates”) are treated

as new degree programs and must adhere to those review procedures. Programs offered through

University Extension and by departments/schools to non-matriculated students do not fall under the

Graduate Council’s authority and are not required to adhere to the Graduate Council’s established

guidelines.

A proposal to establish a new certificate program for matriculated students, including the course

requirements and admission criteria, must be approved by the Graduate Council’s Committee on Degree

Programs and the Graduate Council prior to any action on the part of the department or IDP to admit

students to the program.

A two- to three-page proposal should briefly describe: a) the Program, b) admissions requirements, c)

curriculum, d) completion requirements, e) student assessment, f) faculty expertise, g) number of

students anticipated in the program, and h) administrative contacts.

Any department or interdepartmental degree program (IDP) in the College or Schools may institute a

graduate-level certificate for matriculated graduate students in its subject area according to the

following stipulations.

1. Criteria for admission to the certificate program are established and controlled by the

department or IDP offering the certificate. Only students enrolled at UCLA as graduate students

may participate in the certificate program.

2. The certificate must have no fewer than four courses or 16 quarter units, and no more than

eight courses or 32 quarter units. All courses must be at the graduate-level. None of the

courses can be independent study.

3. The minimum grade point average must be the same as those for the graduate degree

program(s) in the department or IDP.

4. Programs are not permitted to charge any fees for admission into or enrollment in the

certificate program.

5. Evidence of a student’s satisfactory completion of a certificate program is provided by the

department or IDP. As a non-degree program, evidence of completion of an interdisciplinary

certificate program does not appear on the student’s official transcript.

24 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

6. Proposals to establish certificate programs based on the conditions of an extramural funding

agency must specify the duration of the program, indicating whether the certificate will exist

only for the period of the external funding or whether it will continue beyond the funding

period.

7. Requirements for the certificate must be published on the website of the department or IDP

offering the certificate.

8. Certificate programs shall be subject to evaluation by the Academic Senate during the

department or IDP’s 8-Year program review. Departments with administrative oversight of

certificate programs must provide a synopsis of the program in its self-review. If administrative

oversight changes to another department/IDP, that department/IDP is required to submit an

updated proposal no later than four weeks from the date that the Graduate Council is notified

of the change in the administrative reporting structure. The proposal should specify the reasons

for the change in administrative structure and the unit’s commitment to maintaining the quality

and viability of the program.

V. Guidelines for Suspending Admission to a Graduate Degree Program

The following guidelines for suspending admission to a graduate degree program were considered by

the Graduate Council and approved by the Executive Board June 8, 1995.

If a program intends to suspend admission, the department chair must submit a request to the Graduate

Council no later than the start of the third week of Winter Quarter one year prior to the requested

suspension. This provides adequate time for appropriate notification to appear in the catalog.

The request to the Graduate Council must include the following:

• The period of time (dates) of the requested suspension

• The rationale for the suspension

• An impact statement

• Counseling plans

The notification must be accompanied by a record of the full department faculty vote on suspension,

transmitted in a letter from the department chair, with approval memos from the School/College dean

and the Faculty Executive Committee of the College or School.

The rationale statement should discuss why the suspension is necessary. If the suspension is based on

resources, provide a specific explanation of why the current/anticipated resources are insufficient and

what the plan is to remedy the insufficiency so that admissions can resume the when the suspension

ends.

The impact statement should discuss how suspending admissions may affect students currently in the

program. Explain what notification has been given to other units that may be affected by the

suspension. Discuss how/whether the suspension impacts any services or course offerings.

In the counseling statement, detail plans for informing students that admissions are closed and the

counseling that will be available for students who may need to discuss the delay in admissions.

25 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Normally, upon reviewing these documents, the Graduate Council grants the first request for

suspension.

If a second request for a consecutive suspension of admissions is submitted, it will trigger an

administrative review. The request for a second consecutive suspension must be received no later than

the start of week seven of Fall Quarter of the year preceding year in which the requested suspension will

go into effect.

If a second request for a suspension of admissions occurs within an eight-year review period, it will

trigger either an administrative or programmatic review.

VI. Graduate Concurrent and Articulated Programs

It is possible for students to complete studies leading to two degrees through approved concurrent and

articulated degree programs. These types of programs have the advantage of enabling students to

complete two degrees in less time than would normally be required if the courses of instruction were

taken in sequence. The aim of these programs is to provide an integrated curriculum of greater breadth

between the two disciplines. Concurrent programs are designed to allow a specified amount of credit to

apply toward both degrees. Articulated programs do not allow any credit overlap.

Both concurrent and articulated programs must be approved by the Graduate Council. A student may

also create an individually designed articulated program, which must be approved by the Dean of the

Graduate Division. The approval process for the individually designed articulated program is defined in

Standards and Procedures for Graduate Study at UCLA.

Concurrent Programs Articulated Programs

A complete list of approved degrees can be found at http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/

VII. Policies for Self Supporting Programs

A. Divisional Guidelines for the Development and Review of New Self-Supporting Degree and

Senate-regulated Certificate Proposals at UCLA

The Graduate Council approved the following guidelines January 6, 2012

1. Self-Supporting Program Criteria. Per the 2011 Policy on Self-Supporting Graduate Degree

Programs a self-supporting program should meet one or more of the following criteria

("although meeting a single criterion is not necessarily sufficient justification for self-

supporting status"): 1) primarily serve a non-traditional population, such as full-time

employees, mid-career professionals, international students and/or students supported by

their employers; 2) be offered through an alternative mode of delivery, such as online

Degree

Program One

Degree

Program Two

Degree

Program One

Degree

Program Two

26 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

instruction or a hybrid model; 3) be alternatively scheduled, such as during evening,

weekends, and summers; and/or 4) be offered in an alternative locations (e.g., off-campus

centers).

2. Ladder Faculty Involvement. Proposals for new, self-supporting, Senate-regulated graduate

degree and certificate programs must provide a detailed explanation of the measures taken

in designing the self-supporting program to ensure that faculty members will continue to

provide at least the current level of support to existing academic graduate and

undergraduate programs. Ladder rank faculty must be involved in the conception, review,

approval, teaching, and ongoing evaluation of all proposed self-supporting programs; a

description of ladder faculty’s role with the proposed self-supporting program is expected in

the proposal.

3. Program Intent and Congruence With University Mission. New proposals should explain

the intent for creating the self-supporting program and how congruent it is with the mission

of the university and the department’s educational programs; proposals should elaborate on

how the program will contribute to meeting campus strategic goals and priorities.

Additionally, the proposal should state how the proposed program will enhance the

reputation of the department, school and/or university.

4. Teaching Assignments. New proposals must provide a detailed explanation of how teaching

assignments will be managed, as well as an explicit discussion of teaching assignments in

relation to the usual workload of faculty members; the proposal must indicate whether the

concerned faculty members are teaching on an on-load or off-load basis. A description of

the department, division and/or campus policies that deal with teaching load must be

included in the proposal.

5. Recruitment and Relation to Existing Programs. New proposals must describe the intended

audience and academic goals of the program, including how the proposed curriculum offers

students an opportunity to achieve these goals. The proposal should include a comparison

to existing departmental degree programs and a description of how the proposed program

may overlap in the goals, missions and target audience. A description of the recruitment

process and any marketing channels and media that will be deployed to promote the

program should be included in the proposal, as well. In such cases where a contractual

agreement is being contemplated between the university and a private company (including

University Extension) to support the self-supporting program, the proposed arrangement

and draft contract should be submitted with the proposal.

6. Resource Analysis and Disposition of Program Revenue. New proposals must include a

detailed resource analysis from the Office of Academic Planning and Budget (APB), which

ensures that the disposition of the proposed program’s projected revenues will be

transparent and implemented to assure that secondary support services receive a return of

the support needed to maintain excellence in the campus infrastructure. Per the standard

proposal guidelines, the cognizant Dean should consult with the APB upon receipt and

endorsement of the proposal and the APB analysis must be appended to the proposal at the

time it is submitted to the Graduate Council. Upon receipt of the proposal by the Graduate

Council, the proposal will be forwarded to the Academic Senate’s Council on Planning and

Budget (CPB) for further analysis and comment. A CPB statement will be required before the

Graduate Council moves to recommend approval of the proposal to the CCGA. The CPB is

specifically asked to make an assessment of the demonstrated potential of the proposed

27 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

program for offering fiscal support to state-supported, graduate and undergraduate

academic programs on campus.

7. Program Governance. New proposals may require a set of bylaws that detail the

governance of the proposed program, including the levels of engagement by ladder and

adjunct faculty in the administration and execution of the program (i.e., committee

structures) and assurances of financial transparency (i.e., annual reporting requirements).

8. Delivery of Instruction. Proposals for new self-supporting programs that rely heavily on

digital technologies in the delivery of instruction should explain in the proposal how those

technologies will enhance learning and provide access to a larger and more diverse student

population. An assessment of whether the proposed program will create a “substantive

change” as outlined by the Western Associate of Schools and College

(http://www.wascsenior.org/subchange

) must be conducted to ensure compliance with

WASC regulations.

9. Expedited Reviews. CCGA generally requires up to two years to review new degree program

proposals. On an exceptional basis, the CCGA may grant an expedited review. In such cases,

the proposal must meet the following criteria:

a. The proposal must have been subjected to rigorous scrutiny at UCLA;

b. The proposers must solicit reviews from appropriate UC faculty from other campuses, or

appropriate professionals (whose reviews must address criteria as detailed in the CCGA

Handbook, found at:

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/committees/ccga/reports.html

);

c. Proposers must address issues raised by the solicited reviews and make appropriate

adjustments to the proposal;

d. When the proposal is submitted to the UCLA Graduate Council, it must be accompanied

by a detailed narrative explaining how the proposers selected the reviewers and

responded to the issues they raised. Mere endorsement letters will not be accepted.

10. Program Evaluation. Following approval of the proposal and three years after the

admission of the program’s first cohort, the Graduate Council should conduct an

independent review of the self-supporting program. Such a review will involve the collection

of a written progress report from the program’s department chair. The progress report will

first be presented to the Committee on Degree Programs (CDP). The CDP will vet the report

and make its recommendations for further actions to the Graduate Council. In the

precedent years, the self-supporting program will be reviewed annually by the Office of

Academic Planning and Budget; the resultant annual reports should be made available to

the program’s department chair and appended to the year-three progress report to enable

the Council to consider the financial feasibility of the program, in addition to the academic

merits of the program. If necessary, the Graduate Council may request assistance from the

Council on Planning and Budget to conduct a more thorough assessment of the program’s

financial feasibility. Following a successful year-three review by the Graduate Council, the

self-supporting program should then be incorporated into the Academic Senate’s regular,

eight-year program review process. Should immediate concerns arise as a product of the

year-three review the Graduate Council will address them directly with the department

chair and monitor the program’s progress with addressing the concerns. Should the

concerns not be satisfactorily addressed within a reasonable specified period of time, the

28 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Graduate Council will move to suspend admissions to and/or discontinue the self-supporting

degree program as afforded under the Academic Senate’s Appendix V procedures and as

recommended by the CCGA guidelines.

B. UC Policy on Self-Supporting Graduate Degree Programs

Self-supporting programs allow the University to serve additional students above and beyond

the resources provided by the state while fulfilling demonstrated higher education and

workforce needs. Currently, there are populations of working adults not served by UC state-

supported programs who would be willing to enroll in self-supporting graduate degree

programs. This policy is designed to facilitate the establishment of self-supporting programs by

the University and its campuses while ensuring that these programs do not use state resources.

These programs will receive no state-support; however, they have the potential to generate

resources that would enhance the quality, access and affordability of core academic programs

and departments. The full policy text can be found here:

http://ucop.edu/academic-planning-

programs-coordination/_files/documents/self-supportpolicy-2011.pdf

VIII. Undergraduate/Graduate Hybrid Degree Programs

Undergraduate/Graduate hybrid degree programs allow undergraduate students to complete

undergraduate and graduate programs simultaneously. The approval of such programs requires that

particular attention be paid to double-counting of units in the two programs. Proposals for such hybrid

programs must be sent to the Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council simultaneously. Upon

receipt of the proposal, a joint subcommittee of these two standing committees will review the hybrid

program. If approved, the hybrid program proposal is forwarded to CCGA per the guidelines laid out in

Section II.B.1., of the Compendium: Establishment of New Graduate Degree Programs.

1. A campus shall include the anticipated action for the undergraduate/graduate hybrid degree

program in its Five-Year Planning Perspective at least one year prior to campus approval of the

proposal.

2. The Undergraduate Council and Graduate Council both review the proposal.

3. If approved, the proposal is forwarded to CCGA.

IX. Joint Degree Programs

The establishment of new joint graduate degree programs with other higher education institutions

(usually CSU) mirrors the process laid out in Section II.B.1. of the Compendium Establishment of New

Graduate Degree Programs. Systemwide review is required and all sponsoring parties must approve the

proposal. The lead UC campus submits the proposal for systemwide review.

The review process for new joint degree programs is the same as that for new graduate programs

generally. Over time, a basic philosophy of joint programs has emerged within the University. In

particular, joint doctoral programs (JDPs) are designed to combine intellectual and physical resources to

be beneficial to campuses from both systems and to meet a need not currently addressed within the

University. Students enrolled in such programs take advantage of the combined resources and

disciplinary expertise. It is expected that the research interests and program strengths of the proposing

academic departments complement one another in synergistic fashion rather than duplicate existing

offerings. These partnerships broaden the base for program development and provide greater depth of

29 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

curricular and faculty resources. Final review and approval of all JDPs rests with the Joint Graduate

Board (JGB).

X. Dual Degree Programs

A dual degree program is defined as a program of study offered collaboratively by two institutions that

leads to the award of a separate degree from each of the participating institutions. This policy does not

apply to programs of study in which two entities (e.g., schools, colleges, departments) within one

institution offer two distinct degrees that share some course requirements (e.g., a MBA from a business

school and an MSW from a school of social work).

http://www.wascsenior.org/files/Dual_Degrees_Policy.pdf

XI. Departmental Scholars

The Departmental Scholar Program (DSP) allows exceptional juniors and seniors to pursue the bachelor's

and master's degrees simultaneously. Nomination as a Departmental Scholar is an honor that carries

practical benefits-- the graduate application process is simplified and students may be admitted to the

DSP during any academic quarter. Finally, the Departmental Scholar Program offers advanced students

access to graduate level classes and an opportunity to do graduate level research under the direct

supervision of UCLA's distinguished faculty.

1. The department may nominate a student at any time during the academic year. Nomination and

approval must take place at least one full quarter before graduation. (Nomination forms are

available in the department and Honors Programs.)

2. The Chair of the department begins the nomination procedure by completing the

"Departmental Scholar Nomination Form." (The Chair must justify a retroactive nomination or

any exceptions to the eligibility requirements in a memo attached to the nomination form.)

3. In addition, the College requires two letters of recommendation from two faculty members. The

student must submit these letters directly to their department for inclusion in the nomination

packet.

4. The nomination form, together with a copy of the student's transcript and letters of

recommendation, is sent to the Assistant Vice-Provost of Honors, for review.

5. Upon approval by the Assistant Vice-Provost of Honors and the Dean of Graduate Division, the

student is formally admitted to the Departmental Scholar Program.

6. Although the student will be concurrently enrolled in undergraduate and graduate coursework,

the student remains an undergraduate in status and is subject to all rules and regulations

affecting UCLA undergraduates.

For more information, see: http://www.honors.ucla.edu/deptschl.html

30 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

PART SEVEN: OVERVIEW OF ROUTING AND APPROVAL WORKFLOW

The Procedural Manual for the Review of Proposals for Academic Programs and Units

(http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/facultystaff/AcadProgApprovProcedures.pdf

) is an overview of the

routing and approval process for program proposal, with flow charts and brief descriptions. Several of

the workflows for new program proposal are reproduced here. For a comprehensive overview, see the

Procedural Manual.

I. Establish a New Graduate Program, Interdepartmental Degree Program, or

Senate-Regulated Certificate

• Department develops proposal.

• Department submits proposal to Dean of School/College for analysis of academic merit of program.

Dean’s statement of resources and funding is required and must be attached to the proposal.

• Dean of School/College sends proposal to Office of Academic Planning and Budget (APB) for enrollment

and resource analysis. APB may consult with Dean of the School/College.

• Departmental faculty review and vote on proposal.

• Department submits proposal to the Faculty Executive Committee of School/College for review and

approval.

• Proposal is sent to Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends complete proposal to the Office of Analysis and Information Management (AIM)

for review and to the Graduate Division, Council on Planning and Budget (CPB), the Registrar’s Office and

the ad-hoc committee to review and evaluate the proposal. The ad-hoc committee is normally selected

from the Council’s Committee on Degree Programs (CDP).

• Graduate Division, the Registrar’s Office and Council on Planning and Budget (CPB) reports comments to

the ad-hoc committee.

• Ad-hoc committee reviews responses. If revisions are required, it is the responsibility of the CDP Chair to

review suggested changes with the originating unit until proposal appears to warrant final action by

Graduate Council.

• If CDP recommends approval, the proposal is put on the Graduate Council agenda for review and final

approval.

• Graduate Council transmits approval to Executive Vice Chancellor for his/her recommendation and

forwarding to the Office of the President with copy to the Chair of the Academic Senate.

• AIM prepares letter of endorsement/approval for the Executive Vice Chancellor along with approved

proposal and sends to Office of the President for approval and to the Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends copy of EVC letter and copy of proposal dossier to the Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA). The CCGA notifies the Office of the President when it has approved the program.

• Office of the President sends letter of approval to the Executive Vice Chancellor.

• AIM prepares response for Executive Vice Chancellor to notify the Dean of School/College, Department,

Academic Senate, Graduate Division and Registrar’s Office of approval.

• Registrar’s Office contacts Office of the President for new major code.

• The Graduate Division records and posts the approved degree or certificate program requirements.

Note: this section describes degree and certificate programs originating with departments. The first five bullets

are slightly different for new IDPs. See page 18 of this Guide and consult with the Graduate Council Analyst as

needed.

31 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

New Graduate Degree Program, Interdepartmental Degree Program*

or Senate-Regulated Certificate

Department develops proposal

Dean, School/College

review and endorses proposal

Departmental Faculty

vote on proposal

School/College Faculty Executive

Committee reviews and approves

Graduate Council consults with

relevant Senate Committees and

Administration

Graduate Council review and

approves

Executive Vice Chancellor

endorses approval

Grad Council transmits to

Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA)

Registrar’s Office

Dean, School/College,

Department, Graduate Council

Office of the President for approval

To Office of Academic Planning and

Budget for enrollment

and resource analysis

To Office of Analysis and

Information Management

for process review

Executive Vice Chancellor

notifies units of approval

Graduate Division

Note: this section describes degree and certificate programs originating with departments. For IDPs, see

page 18 of this Guide and consult with the Graduate Council Analyst as needed.

32 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

II. Establish a New Joint Graduate Degree Program

• Faculty on each campus meet to consider program.

• The faculty committee on each campus drafts the intercampus degree proposal as directed by campus groups.

The academic aspects of the degree program are considered, including standards of admission with respect to

scholastic qualifications and course preparation, required core courses and recommended electives within the

program to be completed prior to qualifying examination. A brief set of by-laws is drawn up. The proposal

must include all of the details now required for presentation of a program to the Graduate Councils and CCGA.

• Department submits proposal to Dean, School/College for review and endorses proposal.

• Dean, School/College sends to the Office of Academic Planning and Budget for enrollment and resource

analysis.

• Departmental faculty review and vote on proposal.

• Department submits to the Faculty Executive Committee of School/College for review and approval.

• Proposal is sent to Graduate Council on each campus for review and approval.

• Graduate Council sends complete proposal to the Office of Analysis and Information Management (AIM),

Graduate Division and the ad-hoc committee to review and evaluate the proposal. The ad-hoc committee is

normally selected from the Council’s Committee on Degree Programs (CDP). Information copy is sent to the

Chair, Academic Senate.

• Graduate Division, Council on Degree Programs (CDP) and Council on Planning and Budget (CPB) report

comments to the ad-hoc committee.

• Ad-hoc committee reviews responses, if revisions are required; it is the responsibility of the CDP Chair to

review suggested changes with the originating unit until proposal appears to warrant final action by Graduate

Council.

• If CDP recommends approval, the proposal is put on the Graduate Council agenda for review and final

approval.

• Graduate Council notifies the Chair, Academic Senate of the action and sends approval to the Legislative

Assembly for approval.

• Graduate Council transmits approval to Executive Vice Chancellor.

• AIM prepares letter of endorsement/approval for the Executive Vice Chancellor along with approved proposal

and sends to Office of the President for approval and to the Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council transmits to CCGA for approval.

• The CCGA-approved program is then forwarded to the President for authority to grant the specific graduate

degrees jointly on each of the campuses involved. If the proposal is for a new degree, approval by the

Assembly of the Senate is also required. If the proposal is for a program for an existing degree, amendment of

the Standing Orders will be required only in respect to those campuses newly empowered to grant the degree

in the specific field.

• The Office of the President notifies the Executive Vice Chancellor on each of the campuses of approval.

• The Executive Vice Chancellor notifies the Dean, School/College, Department, Graduate Council, Graduate

Division and the Registrar’s Office of approval.

• Registrar’s Office contacts Office of the President for new major code.

• The Graduate Division records and posts the approved program requirements for the joint degree.

33 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

New Joint Graduate Degree Program*

Faculty on each campus meet to

consider program

Dean, School/College

reviews and endorses proposal

Department Faculty on each

campus vote

School/College

Faculty Executive Committee

reviews and approves proposal

Proposal submitted to Graduate

Council on each campus

Graduate Council on each campus

consults with relevant Senate

Committees

Graduate Council reviews and

approves

Executive Vice Chancellor

endorses proposal

Office of the President

for approval

Executive Vice Chancellor notifies

units of approval

Registrar’s Office

Dean, School/College

Department, Graduate Council

To Office of Analysis and Information

Management for process review

Grad Council transmits to Coordinating

Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA)

To Office of Academic Planning

and Budget for enrollment and

resource analysis

*This process assumes a completely

new program for both campuses.

Graduate Division

34 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

III. Establish a New Graduate Degree Designation/Title

• Department develops proposal.

• Department submits proposal to Dean of School/College for analysis of academic merit of program.

Dean’s statement of resources and funding is required of proposed program and must be attached to the

proposal.

• Dean, School/College sends to Office of Academic Planning and Budget for enrollment and resource

analysis and they may consult with Dean of the School/College.

• Departmental faculty review and vote on proposal.

• Department submits to the Faculty Executive Committee of School/College for review and approval.

• Proposal is sent to Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends complete proposal to the Office of Analysis and Information Management (AIM)

for review and to the Graduate Division, Council on Planning and Budget (CPB), the Registrar’s Office and

the ad-hoc committee to review and evaluate the proposal. The ad-hoc committee is normally selected

from the Council’s Committee on Degree Programs (CDP).

• Graduate Division, CDP, and CPB report comments to the ad-hoc committee.

• Ad-hoc committee reviews responses, if revisions are required; it is responsibility of CDP Chair to review

suggested changes with the originating unit until proposal appears to warrant final action by Graduate

Council.

• If CDP recommends approval, the proposal is put on the Graduate Council agenda for review and final

approval.

• Graduate Council notifies the Chair of the Academic Senate of the approval. Action. Senate Executive

Board places the proposal on the agenda of the Legislative Assembly for Divisional approval.

• Academic Senate Chair sends copy of approved proposal and an excerpt of the Graduate Council Minutes

to Executive Vice Chancellor for his/her recommendation and letter to the Office of the President.

• AIM prepares letter of endorsement/approval for the Executive Vice Chancellor along with approved

proposal and sends to Office of the President for approval and to the Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends copy of EVC letter and copy of proposal dossier to the CCGA.

• CCGA approves and sends to systemwide General Assembly/Academic Council for approval.

• General Assembly/Academic Council approves and notifies the Office of the President.

• Office of the President sends letter of approval to the Executive Vice Chancellor.

• AIM prepares response for Executive Vice Chancellor to notify the Dean of School/College, Department,

Graduate Council, Graduate Division and Registrar’s Office, of approval.

• Registrar’s Office contacts Office of the President for new major code.

• The Graduate Division records and posts the approved program requirements for the joint degree.

35 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

New Graduate Degree Designation/Title

Department develops proposal

Dean, School/College

review and endorses proposal

Departmental Faculty

vote on proposal

School/College Faculty Executive

Committee reviews and approves

Graduate Council consults with

relevant Senate Committees and

Administration

Graduate Council review and

approves

Graduate Council forwards approval

to Legislative Assembly

Executive Vice Chancellor

endorses approval

Office of the President

for approval

Grad Council transmits to

Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA)

Registrar’s Office

Dean, School/College,

Department, Graduate Council

Executive Vice Chancellor

notifies units of approval

General Assembly/Academic

Council for approval

Legislative Assembly

for approval

Chair, Academic Senate

transmits approval

To Office of Academic Planning and

Budget for enrollment

and resource analysis

To Office of Analysis and

Information Management

for process review

Graduate Division

36 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

IV. Transfer, Consolidation, Reconstitution or Discontinuance of a Graduate

Degree Program

• Faculty develop Appendix V proposal.

• Dean, School/College reviews and endorses proposal and sends to the Office of Academic Planning and

Budget for enrollment and resource analysis.

• Departmental faculty review and vote on the proposal.

• Department submits proposal to the Faculty Executive Committee of School/College for review and

approval and transmits to the Chair of the Academic Senate.

• Senate Executive Board initiates Appendix V action. The Chair of Academic Senate sends to the

Designated Committee and the Office of Analysis and Information Management (AIM) for review.

• Graduate Council consults with relevant Senate Committees and other campus stakeholders as

appropriate, and may request an ad hoc committee.

• Office of Analysis and Information Management sends systemwide notice to UCOP of Appendix V action.

• Graduate Council submits report to Chair, Academic Senate and to Legislative Assembly for approval.

• Legislative Assembly votes on recommendations.

• Chair of the Academic Senate transmits approval.

• AIM prepares letter of endorsement/approval for the Executive Vice Chancellor along with approved

proposal and sends to Office of the President for approval and to the Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends copy of EVC letter and copy of proposal to the Chair of the Coordinating

Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA).

• CCGA reviews and approves and sends to the Office of the President.

• Office of the President sends letter of approval to the Executive Vice Chancellor.

• Office of Analysis and Information Management prepares response for Executive Vice Chancellor to notify

the Dean of the School/College, Department, Graduate Council, Graduate Division and Registrar’s Office

of approval.

This page describes the case in which the department or IDP itself initiates the Appendix V action. Other entities

may do so; see Appendix V of the UCLA Academic Senate Manual.

37 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Transfer, Consolidation, Reconstitution or Discontinuance of Graduate Degree

Program

Faculty develop Appendix V Proposal

Dean, School/College

reviews and endorses proposal

Department Faculty vote on proposal

School/College Faculty Executive

Committee for review and approval

Executive Board initiates Appendix V

Chair, Academic Senate sends to

designated committees (GC)

Graduate Council consults with

relevant Senate Committees

Graduate Council submits report to

Chair, Academic Senate

Executive Vice Chancellor endorses

proposal

Office of the President for approval

Executive Vice Chancellor notifies

units of approval

Registrar’s Office

Dean, School/College

Department, Graduate Council

To Office of Analysis and Information

Management for process review

Grad Council transmits to Coordinating

Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA)

To Office of Academic Planning

and Budget for enrollment and

resource analysis

Chair, Academic Senate forwards to

Legislative Assembly for approval

Chair, Academic transmits approval

Legislative Assembly for

approval

Graduate Division

38 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

V. Suspension of Admission to a Graduate Degree Program

• Department faculty develop a suspension proposal.

• The department submits proposal to the School/College Dean for review and endorsement.

• The School/College Dean sends the proposal to the Office of Academic Planning and Budget (APB) for

enrollment and resource analysis.

• The department faculty votes on the suspension.

• The department sends the suspension proposal to the School/College Faculty Executive Committee for

review and approval.

• Proposal is sent to the Graduate Council.

• The Graduate Council consults with relevant Senate Committees, other campus stakeholders and the

Administration.

• The Graduate Council determines the level of review required. Normally, the first request for suspension

will be granted. If a second consecutive suspension is requested, the Graduate Council will initiate an

administrative review. If a second request for suspension is requested within an eight-year review period,

the Graduate Council will initiate either an administrative or a programmatic review.

• After receiving comments and reviewing the proposal, the Graduate Council votes on the suspension of

admission request.

• Graduate Council notifies the Dean of the Graduate Division, the School/College Dean, department chair,

the Office of Analysis and Information Management, and the Registrar’s Office.

• The Registrar’s Office records the suspension in the Student Records System.

• The Graduate Division disables applications to the program.

Note: Suspension of admission may be a recommendation that emerges through the Senate program review

process and can be initiated by the Graduate Council. There are significant differences in that process.

39 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Suspension of Admission to a Graduate Degree Program

Department Faculty develops a

suspension proposal

Dean, School/College reviews and

endorses proposal

Department Faculty votes on a

suspension proposal

School/College Faculty Executive

Committee reviews and approves

Graduate Council consults with

relevant Senate Committees and

Administration

Dean, School/College,

Department

Dean, Graduate Division,

Registrar’s Office

Office of Analysis and Information

Management

To Office of Academic Planning and

Budget for resource analysis

First suspension request:

Graduate Council approves and notifies

Second consecutive suspension request:

Graduate Council initiatives an

administrative review

Second suspension request within an eight-

year review period:

Graduate Council initiates either an

administrative or a programmatic review

Graduate Council votes on the

suspension and notifies units

Graduate Council determines level of

review

40 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

VI. Name Change of a Graduate Degree Program

• Department develops proposal.

• Department submits proposal to Dean – School/College for review and endorses proposal.

• Dean, School/College sends to the Office of Academic Planning and Budget for enrollment and resource

analysis.

• Departmental faculty review and vote on proposal.

• Department submits proposal to the Faculty Executive Committee of School/College for review and

approval.

• Proposal is sent to Graduate Council.

• Graduate Council sends complete proposal to relevant Senate Committees for comments and approval

and to the Office of Analysis and Information and Management.

• Graduate Council reviews and approves and sends approval to the Executive Vice Chancellor for his/her

recommendation and letter to the Office of the President.

• Office of Analysis and Information Management prepares response for Executive Vice Chancellor to notify

the Office of the President, Dean of School/College, Department, Graduate Council and Registrar’s Office

of approval.

• Graduate Council sends copy of EVC letter and copy of proposal to the Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA) for information.

• Registrar’s Office contacts Office of the President for new major code.

41 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

Name Change of a Graduate Degree Program

Department develops proposal

Dean, School/College

review and endorses proposal

Departmental Faculty

vote on proposal

School/College Faculty Executive

Committee reviews and approves

Graduate Council consults with

relevant Senate Committees and

Administration

Graduate Council review and

approves

Executive Vice Chancellor

endorses approval

Office of the President

for approval

Grad Council transmits to

Coordinating Committee on

Graduate Affairs (CCGA)

Registrar’s Office

Dean, School/College,

Department, Graduate Council

Executive Vice Chancellor

notifies units of approval

To Office of Academic Planning and

Budget for enrollment

and resource analysis

To Office of Analysis and

Information Management

for process review

42 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014

INDEX

Academic Senate

committee of degree programs...................................... 3

graduate council ............................................................. 3

Graduate Council ................................................................ 3

New Graduate Program ...................................................... 8

5-Year Planning Perspective ........................................... 8

decanal support .............................................................. 9

library support ................................................................ 9

organization .................................................................. 10

proposal sections.......................................................... 11

abstract .................................................................... 15

courses ..................................................................... 13

fee structure ............................................................ 14

introduction ............................................................. 11

professional developement ..................................... 15

program description ................................................ 11

projected need ......................................................... 12

regulation changes ................................................... 15

resource requirements and enrollment plan ........... 13

student support ....................................................... 14

teaching staff ........................................................... 12

WASC substantive change review ............................ 15

resource analysis ............................................................ 9

sample cover page ........................................................ 10

New Program Required Appendices ................................. 16

appendix A-CPEC .......................................................... 16

appendix B-draft of program requirements ................. 18

appendix C- decanal endorsements ............................. 18

appendix D-FEC endorsement ...................................... 18

appendix E-resource analysis ....................................... 18

appendix F-university librarian endorsement .............. 18

appendix G-support letters peer programs .................. 18

appendix H-draft bylaws .............................................. 18

appendix I-departmental letters of commitment ........ 19

Online Resources ................................................................ 4

Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines

appointment of IDP committees .................................. 24

concurrent and articulated programs .......................... 27

departmental letters of commitment .......................... 20

departmental scholars ................................................. 31

dual degree programs .................................................. 31

eligible committee lists for IDPs ................................... 23

hybrid degree programs .............................................. 30

interdisciplinary certificates ......................................... 25

joint degree programs ................................................. 31

self-supporting programs ............................................. 28

suspending admission .................................................. 26

Program Requirement Update Form .................................. 5

Program Requirements ...................................................... 5

change existing requirements ........................................ 5

deadline to submit program changes ............................ 6

preparation of proposed text ........................................ 6

program requirement update form ............................... 5

propose a new graduate program ................................. 8

sample track changes ..................................................... 7

Routing and Approval Workflow

name change of a graduate degree program .............. 44

new graduate degree designation/title ....................... 38

new graduate program ................................................ 33

new interdepartmental degree program ..................... 33

new joint graduate degree program ............................ 36

new senate-regulated certificate program .................. 33

suspension of admission .............................................. 42

transfer, consolidation, or disestablishment ............... 40

43 / Guide to Graduate Program Approval Winter 2014