Impact of Program Review in Canadian Post-secondary Education: A Qualitative Case Study
Keywords:
program review, qulity assurance, post-secondary education, strategic planning, faculty agencyAbstract
Using a qualitative case study research design, this study examined the phenomenon of program review at a mid-sized vocational college in British Columbia, Canada, and the experiences of five department leaders and program coordinators engaging in program review. The study sought to answer the following questions: What is the experience of faculty and program coordinators leading the program review process? Is the program review meaningful? Is the program review manageable? Can a program review process be both meaningful and manageable? Are the meaningfulness and manageability of program review in conflict with one another? Participants recognized the potential impact of program review in terms of creating space for analytic and critical reflection to interrogate the influence of reviews on institutional strategic planning, advocacy for departmental and institutional resources, and assessment of program viability within the broader academic mission of the institution. However, complex power dynamics at play within program review for improvement versus for accountability were highlighted as a point of tension and resistance that prevents the realization of the ideals of program review.
References
Barak, R. J. (2007). Thirty years of academic review and approval by state postsecondary coordinating and governing boards. State Higher Education Executive Officers. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502182
Barak, R. J., & Breier, B. E. (1990). Successful program review: A practical guide to evaluating programs in academic settings (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Bresciani, M. J. (2010). Data-driven planning: Using assessment in strategic planning. New Directions for Student Services, 2010(132), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.374
Conrad, C. F., & Wilson, R. F. (1985). Academic program reviews: Institutional approaches, expectations, and controversies. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 5. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED264806.pdf
Coombs, V. (2017, February 6). Institutions should link program reviews to strategic plans. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/call-action-marketing-and-communications-higher-education/institutions-should-link-program
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071802756
Davison, D., Patton, J., Eng, M., Hanna, K., Grimes-Hillman, M., Watson, I., Jackson, J., & Vazquez, U. (2009). Program review. California Community College, Academic Senate. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED510580.pdf
de Valenzuela, J. S., Copeland, S. R., & Blalock, G. A. (2005). Unfulfilled expectations: Faculty participation and voice in university program evaluation. Teachers College Record, 107(10), 2227-2247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.005
Eastman, J., Jones, G. A., Trottier, C., & Bégin-Caouette, O. (2022). University governance in Canada: Navigating complexity. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Ebersole, T. E. (2009). Postsecondary assessment: Faculty attitudes and levels of engagement. Assessment Update, 21(2), 2–14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/au.212
Groen, J. F. (2017). Engaging in enhancement: Implications of participatory approaches in higher education quality assurance. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 89–99. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4728
Guzmán-Valenzuela, C. (2016). Connecting theory and practice in qualitative research. In Theory and method in higher education research (Vol. 2, pp. 115-133). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2056-375220160000002006
Harlan, B. (2012). Meta-review: Systematic assessment of program review. US-China Education Review, A8, 740-754. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED536464
Hoare, A. (2024). Ethic of critique. In A. Hoare, O. B. Osuntade, & R. Patel (Eds.), Ethical educational leadership: Untangling ethical dilemmas and imagining alternative futures. TRU Open Press. https://leadershipethics.pressbooks.tru.ca/chapter/ethic-of-critique/
Hoare, A., Wagner, S., & Dishke Hondzel, C. (2024). Description of an approach for analyzing external program reviews to inform educational planning. Educational Planning Journal, 31(2), 39-50. https://isep.info/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Vol-31-No-2-Web-Version.pdf
Hoare, A., Dishke Hondzel, C., & Wagner, S. (2022). Forming an academic program review learning community: Description of a conceptual model. Quality Assurance in Education, 30(4), p. 401-415. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-01-2022-0023
Hoare A., Dishke Hondzel, C., Wagner, S., & Church, S. (2024). A course-based approach to conducting program review. Discover Education, 3, Article 5 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44217-023-00085-4
Jarrell, L., & Kirby, D. (2024). Managing quality assurance at community colleges in Ontario, Canada: Experiences and perspectives of front-line quality managers. Quality Assurance in Education, 32(2), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-11-2023-0194
Jayachandran, J., Neufeldt, C., Smythe, E., & Franke, O. (2019). Practical measures for institutional program reviews: A case study of a small post-secondary institution. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49(2), 54-71. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v49i2.188229
Jones, S. R., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2022). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research in higher education: Essential elements and issues (3rd edition). Routledge.
Kelchen, R. (2018). Higher education accountability. John Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.1353/book.58123
Kleniewski, N. (2003). Program review as a win-win opportunity. AAHE Bulletin, 55(9). https://www.aahea.org/articles/win-win.htm
Lindauer, J. R., & Coward, P. A. (2021). Assessment of student learning in the arts, humanities, social sciences, and sciences. In J. R. Lindauer & P. A. Coward (Eds.), Exemplars of Assessment in Higher Education Diverse Approaches to Addressing Accreditation Standards (pp. 26–38). Stylus Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003444701-4
Lock, J., Hill, S. L., & Dyjur, P. (2018). Living the curriculum review: Perspectives from three leaders. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 48(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v48i1.187975
McGowan, V. (2019). Not too small to be strategic: The state of academic program review guidelines and instrumentation in public institutions. Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice and Research, 9(1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1221214
Mets, L. A. (1995). Lessons learned from program review experiences. New Directions for Institutional Research, 1995(86), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.37019958608
Merriam S. & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.) Jossey-Bass.
Ministry of Postsecondary Education and Future Skills. (2024, September). Quality assessment process and criteria: BC public postsecondary institutions. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/post-secondary-education/institution-resources-administration/degree-authorization/bc_public_institution_quality_assessment_handbook.pdf
Mourad, R. P. (2017). Social control and free inquiry: Consequences of Foucault for the pursuit of knowledge in higher education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 66(3), 321–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2017.1379593
Mussawy, S. A. J., & Rossman, G. B. (2018). Quality assurance and accreditation in Afghanistan: Faculty members’ perceptions from selected universities. Higher Learning Research Communications, 8(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1201352
Neufeldt, C., Smythe, E., Jayachandran, J., & Franke, O. (2023). Cyclical program reviews at smaller post-secondary institutions: Can the time and effort be justified? The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(2), Article 9, https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotlrcacea.2023.2.14417
Openo, J. A., Laverty, C., Kolomitro, K., Borin, P., Goff, L., Stranach, M., & Gomaa, N. (2017). Bridging the divide: Leveraging the scholarship of teaching and learning for quality enhancement. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2017.2.6
Senter, M. S., Ciabattari, T., & Amaya, N. V. (2020). Sociology departments and program review: Chair perspectives on process and outcomes. Teaching Sociology, 49(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X20970268
Skolnik, M. L. (2016). How academic program review can foster intellectual conformity and stifle diversity of thought and method. The Journal of Higher Education, 60(6), 619–643. https://doi.org/10.2307/1981945
Sonday, A., Ramugondo, E., & Kathard, H. (2020). Case study and narrative inquiry as merged methodologies: A critical narrative perspective. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 160940692093788. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937880
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Sage Publications.
Sullivan, P. (2012). Qualitative data analysis using a dialogical approach. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268391
Vettori, O. (2018). Shared misunderstandings? Competing and conflicting meaning structures in quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 24(2), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2018.1491786
Weiner, W. F. (2009). Establishing a culture of assessment. Academe, 95(4), 28–32. http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/academe/2009/JA/Feat/wein.htm
Whedbee, J. C. (2009). A narrative analysis using multiple case studies of nursing graduates who overcame academic adversity (Publication No. 1538) [Doctoral dissertation, Andrews University]. Andrews University. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dissertations/1538
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Claire Sauve, Alana Hoare, Gloria Ramirez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
