| Research Method | Used When | Targets | Cautions | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment/ Comparison Against Industry Standard | To measure the department's performance against a known and accepted best practice standard outside the university. |
CAS or some other standard to be determined during the initial meeting. |
Choose a standard that is appropriate for measuring true unit performance. |
A written analysis (with data) of this Used for all reviews |
| External Reviewer | An expert, outside opinion will contribute to the research effort. |
Paid consultants, industry experts, peers at other universities. Conducts an on-campus visit, interviews department members, consults with committee members, writes a report and sends to co-chairs to be considered in drafting the final report. |
Represents just one person's view. If a paid consultant, could add significantly to the cost of the review. |
• Discuss at the initial meeting • Write expectations for the reviewer beforehand • Provide guidelines for writing the report Used for almost all reviews |
| Personal Interviews | The committee needs to quickly learn the key issues affecting the department. |
Members of the department, key constituents. | These are just individual opinions and perceptions. Look for trends across all research. |
When how a department functions internally is Used for almost all reviews |
| Focus Group | Perceptions of the department are needed. Ideas about department improvement from key constituents would be valuable. |
Various. A review may consider multiple focus groups, one for students, one of internal department members, one of professional colleagues, etc. |
A focus group is a moderated discussion, not the vehicle for delivering a survey. The goal is the communication of unrehearsed, top-of-mind perceptions. |
• Often used to help write surveys Used for many reviews |
| Survey | The department has a large number of core customers/constituents throughout the campus or off. When trending information from a large group of people is needed. |
Those who are most likely to use the department's services. |
The survey instrument should be carefully crafted. Keep a central focus on what you want to learn and do not stray. Keep it very brief, be specific |
It is recommended that every program review Used for many reviews |
| Peer Study | The department is involved in highly specific and/or technical work where it us unrealistic to assume that members of the committee will have much knowledge of the department's work. |
Multiple persons at other universities/institutions who perform the same or similar work. |
Each peer will respond to the research out of the context of his or her particular institution. Keep in mind the uniqueness of JMU and the department. |
CSDC, Res Life, and OIR may be key areas Used for some reviews |
| Document Review | Used when the committee feels that communication and information flow and processing may be at issue. |
Documents, manuals, websites, etc. | Since every department generates volumes of information, it will be important to narrow the focus. You cannot review everything. |
Especially important for a department that Used for some reviews |
| Internal Process Study | Used when a department's internal data flow and information process is directly tied to customer service success. |
Work flow charts, interviews with members of the department, department data entry policies, etc. |
Members of the program review committee may not have enough knowledge to make significant recommendations. Therefore, this subcommittee may take considerable work. |
Used for some reviews |
