The Three Stages


Stage Two: The External Review

The External Review provides an opportunity for program faculty and administrators to gain a perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the program from academicians and practitioners outside of the university. Serving as an ERT, the primary charge of these individuals is to review the Internal Self-Study and make substantive comments regarding each of the major areas. The External Review Team is normally composed of six individuals-two individuals from within the university and four external to the university. Upon completion of their work, they will produce an External Report that will identify strengths of the program and make recommendations for improvement.

Criteria for the Selection of the External Review Team
Chairperson of the External Review Team
External Review Team Members
The External Report
Faculty Response to the External Report

Criteria for the Selection of the External Review Team

[View as a Word Document]

The External Review Team must be approved through:  Department Head, Dean, Vice Provost, and Academic Program Review Coordinator.

The primary charge of the ERT is to review the Internal Self-Study, attend an onsite visit with the department and make substantive comments regarding each of the major areas for the APR.  Upon completion of their work, they will produce an External Report that will identify strengths of the program and make recommendations for improvement.

  • Two of the External Team members must be JMU faculty from outside of the program's college.  One of these members will serve as the chairperson for the External Review Team.
  • Two members of the External Review Team should be academicians from peer institutions outside of the Commonwealth of Virginia with significant regional and national visibility in the discipline being reviewed.
  • One or two practitioner members should be chosen from persons employed in areas related to the program.  They should be individuals who can provide valuable information relative to career demands and development.
  • One graduate of the program within the past two to five years is selected who can provide a perspective on the contribution of the program to their career.


James Madison University shall not knowingly select an off-campus person as an evaluator on an external academic program review committee if that evaluator:

1. Has been - within the last ten years - a compensated consultant, an appointee or employee of the institution, or has been a candidate within the past five years for        employment at the institution.

2. Has a close personal or familial relationship with persons at the institution or a strong bias regarding the institution.

3. Is a member of an association or professional activity that an impartial person might reasonably conclude would serve as an impediment to rendering an impartial, objective professional judgment regarding the accreditation of an institution.

[Back to top]

Chairperson of the External Review Team

The role of the chairperson is to ensure that the external team members develop program recommendations based on several sources of information. This would include the internal self-study report, documentation from university sources and interviews with faculty, students, and administrators. The chairperson has the responsibility to:

  • Gather any supplemental information requested by team members prior to the onsite visit.
  • Notify the Coordinator of Program Review to contact additional persons that the team requests for interviewing during the onsite visit.
  • Ensure that the APR Guidelines are followed.
  • Chair the interview process and ensure that the timeline and schedule is followed as much as possible.
  • Review the schedule developed for the onsite visit and makes any needed changes.
  • Assign team members writing responsibilities for sections of the external report following the outline of the self-study.
  • Inform team members of their role in the exit interview.
  • Set the deadline for written responses and editorial comments from team members and compose the final written report.
  • Submit the written report to the Coordinator of Academic Program Review within thirty to forty-five days of the onsite visit.

[Back to top]

External Review Team Members

The role of the committee is to:

  • Review the Internal Self-Study and make substantive comments and recommendations regarding each of the major areas covered.
  • Assist the chairperson by reading the Internal Self-Study and identifying any issues or additional information needed before the onsite visit.
  • Interview faculty, students, and administrators who have a direct impact on the program.
  • Act as consultants to the program by providing information and expertise based on their experience and involvement with similar programs elsewhere.
  • Provide the unique perspective of the "real world" activities of persons graduating from programs in the discipline being reviewed.
  • Participate in the writing and editing of the external report.
  • Provide recommendations for program improvement giving consideration to personnel, planning, and accommodations.

[Back to top]

The External Report

The Chairperson of the ERT, after receiving written responses from all members of the team, writes the External Review Report. The report should follow the outline referenced at the end of these guidelines. The report should be approximately ten to twelve pages in length. It should summarize the findings of the External Review Team and provide specific recommendations relative to each section of the Internal Self-Study Report. The report should also include an Executive Summary of two to three pages. The complete report is sent to the Coordinator of Academic Program Review. It is photocopied and forwarded to the department/program and Dean. Both the Internal Self-Study Report and the External Review Report are archived in Carrier Library. At all levels, recommendations made by the External Review Team are incorporated into the planning process. The Academic Council reviews the recommendations of the internal and external reports and is responsible for incorporating the results of the APRs into the Master Plan for the Division of Academic Affairs. Central to this process is prioritizing the needs of various programs and allocating necessary resources to them.

[Back to top]

Faculty Response to the External Report

The faculty of the program being reviewed has the opportunity to respond to the recommendations made by the ERT. A written response to the recommendations made in the External Team Report may be submitted to the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs through the Dean of the college. The intent of the response is to address any factual errors made by the ERT.

[Back to top]

Stage One: The Internal Self-Study
Stage Three: The Action Plan