Curriculum Planning

Proposals to create or revise courses are submitted through CIM Courses. Graduate course proposals require review and approval at the department/program and college/school levels but do not require review by the Graduate Assembly. Undergraduate course proposals require review and approval by the department/program, college/school, Undergraduate Curriculum Committee and Undergraduate Assembly. 

Note that once workflow has been started in CIM Courses, the software provides a different interface for review and approval.

Proposals to create and revise degrees, certificates, and minors are submitted through CIM Programs. Different kinds of proposals require different approval steps.

Note that once workflow has been started in CIM Programs, the software provides a different interface for review and approval.

In general, CIM guides proposals through three phases:

1. Planning: faculty proponents work with department/program leadership, college/school leadership,, and the Provost’s Office to ensure that the proposal aligns with institutional priorities and follows necessary guidelines. For certain program changes, the planning process may be minimal. For new degrees, it will be extensive, involving detailed financial planning and market analysis.  
2. Proposing: the completed proposal is reviewed through the shared-governance process, this will include committees at the department/program and college/school levels (if not already engaged in planning) as well as chairs and deans. New programs and significant changes require review by the Undergraduate and Graduate Assemblies and their subcommittees. Approvals by the Dean of the Graduate School (for Graduate proposals) and the Provost are required. Several types of proposals require approval by the UT System, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB), and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). From the end of planning to final approval the process may take as long as a year, depending on the nature and number of approvals required.
3. Implementing: after all necessary approvals, there are still steps to follow including publication in the catalog and, for new programs, notifying Enrollment Management (Admissions), Student Success (Advising), Marketing Messaging and Engagement, and other University offices.

• UTA New Delivery Mode Program Request Form

• Academic Program Approval Process
• Proces to Create International Collaborations
• Process to Expand an Existing Degree Program
• Process to Create a Dual Credit MOU

Academic programs may be offered in more than one mode of delivery or in a different mode of delivery than originally offered. Review and approval to offer academic programs in a hybrid/blended (>50% & <100% online) or 100% online mode is required at the department/program, school/college, and provost levels; external agency notification or approval may also be required. Complete the UTA New Delivery Mode Program Request Form and attach it to the CIM Programs form where indicated.

For new degree programs, THECB requires us to document evidence of demonstrated need with respect to employment, student demand, and competing programs (all three). 

• For employment, consider, in addition to THECB-provided data, sources such as Bureau of Labor Statistics, Texas Workforce Development Toolkit, and Texas Workforce Commission.  
• For student demand, consider enrollment trends, Seek UT, results of student/recruitment surveys, and other documented expressions of student interest. 
• For competing programs, indicate how the proposed program will distinguish itself or meet demand for qualified applicants that cannot be met by competitors (e.g., no comparable programs; or identified programs unable to expand capacity for qualified applicants).

Program-level student competencies are succinct statements of broad knowledge, skills, attitudes, or behaviors that students should be able to demonstrate upon completion of the plan of study. In cases where a program does not have prescribed learning objectives (such as those from a disciplinary accreditor), program faculty should come to consensus on approximately 3-5 student competencies from which more specific, measurable student learning outcomes can be derived for the program as well as its courses.

Example competency statement:
Upon graduation, students will be able to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems. 

For additional information and examples, please see the Unit Effectiveness Process Assessment Handbook (student competency and learning outcome information begins on page 19). Inquiries about competency statements and their role in assessment may be directed to uep@uta.edu.