A good program

What makes a good university degree program? Today, I am writing mainly about undergraduate programs. It is easy to determine whether or not a program is good by assessing the success of its graduates. But showing that a program is good is a different enterprise than explaining why it is good. What makes a good program depends on its mission, whether or not it has a strategic plan, the quality of its strategic plan, and whether or not is sticks to that plan. Hands down, the best degree programs have rigorous sets of requirements that serve to direct students through a degree plan that builds upon itself from semester to semester.

A mission statement is simply a concise way to voice a program’s goals by answering, “What does this program do?” A strategic plan is a pathway for addressing the goals of the mission, but it may incorporate challenges such as changes in student needs. The mission and strategic plan are by the faculty members, for them. These represent guideposts for decisions on how to use departmental resources for program needs. If a department is trying to do everything well, its programs will not succeed, and its students will suffer.

From the student side of the equation, a good program should produce a rigorous degree plan. Good degree plans are all too often compromised for convenient ones. In a good program, there will be a slew of core courses that provide the foundation for the field of interest, early in the curriculum. These early courses will build conceptual and skills-based knowledge that are applied in specialized upper-division classes in the research areas of faculty members in the program. To develop such a program, expectations of students must be clearly stated and fairly stout. Be wary of the “do it all” or the “do it yourself” degree program. Substituting elective courses for required ones should rarely, if ever, occur. This, of course, entails that required classes be offered on a regular basis. Constant exception-making, however, weakens a program.  The program should seek to accommodate those seeking to 'learn its subject matter' not those seeking to 'obtain its degree,' which are two very different things.

Undergraduate programs also provide broad foundations through college and university required courses. Electives add some freedom for exploration as well. But the degree requirements for a program should provide focus. Sound too restrictive? Here are some tangible benefits to a well-planned program.

First, because faculty members design the program, they are more likely to clearly assess and actualize meaningful roles for their classes in it. Second, through sequencing of core courses, students benefit from the integrated set of classes and their meaningful roles. The sum is greater than the parts. Third, students start to operate in cohorts. That is, they matriculate through the program in groups, which integrates knowledge even more effectively. Contrast this to an unstructured program with few requirements in which students take courses willy nilly and barely know one another at all. A great way to assess the structure and strength of a program is simply to observe whether or not cohesion exists among students. If none of the students know one another, that’s a bad sign. Ideally, groups (cohorts) that move through classes together should be sharing the program’s challenges.

Amongst many other advantages (too many to cover), well-designed programs are better able to accommodate growth because there is a sense of what is important. Further, shared goals generate shared pride among students and faculty. In choosing a university, a major, or even a graduate program, these are the qualities that students should seek. In building programs, these are the operating principles that faculty members should uphold.