UCC Checklist for the Evaluation of the Program Revision Proposals

Program Title:		Date Recieved:
Preliminary Evaluation Date:	Subcommittee Evaluation Date:	UCC Evaluation Date:

Review item			OK	Remarks / Recommendations
Submission:
Format in general (completeness of the forms) (Latest version of the most proper form; No blank spaces left etc...)
Deadlines (Initiation: no later than 2 semesters; Senate Approval: no later than 3 months before implementation semester)
Board Approvals (Department Board, Faculty/School Board)
Consultations (Other academic units affected by the changes; GE Department Head; Vice Rector for Academic Affairs if the title or diploma degree has been changed; Vice Rector for budget and financing if additional resources required)
Curriculum:
Compliance with the core curriculum policy (The category of courses should be specified properly;  6 SPIKE, 1 History, 1 Turkish, 2 English, 2 Critical Thinking Skills, 1 Computer Literacy, total of 8 courses from Math and social sciences (at least 3 in this category one of wich is Math, the other Physical/Natural Sciences), 2-3 from Arts and Humanities, 2 or 3 from Social/Behavioral Sciences; At least 3 University Electives from these three categories containing 8 courses; More or all of these 8 courses can be left as a University elective course; at least 5 Faculty Core Courses; 12-16 Area Core Courses; at least 4 or more Area Elective Courses; A total of 20 Area Core and Area Elective courses)
Coherence and relevance of justifications in general (The departments should explain, in detail, why the Department / School wants to make these changes. The explanation can include, among other things, changes in the department’s focus, changes in the field, changes in quality standards, changes in expectations regarding the qualifications of graduates, or weaknesses in the old program that the new program is designed to rectify. Some historical background and a comparative analysis with the programs of some universities will be most appropriate.)
Appropriateness of course coding (4 letter field code; 3 letter numeric code; no space; no sub discipline based field codes; odd third digits for fall semesters)
Format and length of course titles and descriptions (60 characters; hyphenated use of roman numerals (“-I”, “-II” etc.) in sequential courses; limited number of sequential courses; Concise and clear language; 30 character transcript title)
Course contents (Max. 2000 characters; concise and clear language; no overlap with similar courses)
Calculation of the credits of the individual courses and the total credit of the program (Credit = Lec + ½ (lab+tut), the digits after the decimal point of the resultant number is dropped)
Consistency of the use of credits in different sections of the form
Compliance of the course credit descriptions with policies (mainly 3 credit courses; seminar and professional orientation courses are 1 credit, SPIKE is 0 credit, HIST 200 is 2 credit)
Total credit or student work load appropriateness (Total of 40 3-4 credit courses excluding SPIKE, Turkish and History, 120-145 total credits)
Reasonable distribution of courses among semesters (Five 3-4 credit courses per semester excluding SPIKE, Turkish and History)
Reasonable prerequisites and co-requisites (Very limited number of courses should be assigned as “prerequisite” or “co requisite”. Prerequisites should be limited to sequential courses if possible)
Appropriateness of academic ownership of the courses (The courses should be offered by a department which hosts the field of the course. For example, Math courses by Math department)
Justifiable minimum overlap among similar courses (A course can not be opened in the presence of an existing course with similar content. Vocational school courses are exceptional)
Accreditation:
Compliance with the requirements of YÖK
Compliance with the requirements of ABET or any other accreditation body if applicable
Implementation:
Sufficiency of human resources
Sufficiency of physical resources
Justified budget and financing
Proper initiation semester
Existence of the implementation guide
Additional Remarks:
Overall:
	Recommend without reservation	Recommend with minor corrections/recomendations indicated above			Not recommended