Though the program audit will be the most common means of identifying programs for review, for a variety of judgmental reasons, administrators or planning committees also might ask for review of a program which had not been selected through the audit process. That the institutional processes and procedures for reexamination of existing academic programs should take the form judged by the faculty and the administration as being the most effective way of integrating the audit and review process into institutional planning. That the agencies and procedures used for reexamination of academic programs should be specifically described in the policies of the institution and disseminated to all constituencies in the institution and shared with Central Administration, Office of Academic Affairs. That the Central Administration Office of Academic Affairs shall annually undertake a limited number of statewide or systemwide audits, reviews, or studies of selected academic programs or disciplinary areas. That the most important single ingredient for the success of System level program audits and reviews is the credibility of the exercise as viewed by the faculties.
Faculty are responsible for shaping and evaluating curricula.
They are subject to peer evaluation of their work and academic programs. Therefore, the identification and involvement of a peer group responsible for audit and review and acceptable to a faculty body needs to be accomplished carefully, with particular attention to disciplinary differences, levels of expertise, and experience. For these reasons, the UW System employs alternate operational protocols in conducting System audits and reviews of academic programs. That it is as important for the UW System and its institutions to evaluate its methods, processes, and purposes for program audits and reviews as it is to actually conduct the reexamination of academic programs. However, each institution is free to expand the criteria to be used.