Dearborn Graduate Board
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE GRADUATE BOARD
1. Graduate Board Membership
The Graduate Board is an advisory board reporting to the Provost and Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Membership for the Dearborn Graduate Board is shown in the table below.
GRADUATE BOARD MEMBERSHIP
NO OF MEMBERS
COLLEGE OF ARTS, SCIENCES AND LETTERS
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
FACULTY SENATE REPRESENTATIVE
ASSOCIATE PROVOST (EX-OFFICIO CHAIR OF BOARD)
a) Full-time tenure-track members of the campus governing faculty are eligible to participate in the Graduate Board election in accordance with the current procedures. Faculty members shall be elected through an electronic balloting process. Alternate members will also be selected during this election. Each unit representative will have one vote.
b) Graduate student members will be selected through a process of nomination and election to serve on the Board. No more than one student may be elected from any one college or school. Each elected student will have one vote.
c) The Faculty Senate representative will be selected by a vote of the Faculty Senate according to procedures adopted by that body. The Senate representative will have one vote.
d) The Associate Provost will be an ex-officio member and serve as chair of the Board. The chair will cast a vote only in the event of a tie.
3. Term of Service on Graduate Board
The term of office for unit representatives on the Board will be for three years. These terms are staggered so that at least two but no more than three members’ terms will expire each year. Retiring unit representatives are eligible to serve a second term after which they must rotate off for at least one year before being eligible for another full term on the Board. The Faculty Senate representative will serve a one-year term with the possibility of renewal for an additional year. Student members of the Board will serve a term of one year with the possibility of renewal for an additional year.
Note: Current members of the Graduate Board will continue their service until the end of their regular terms, and will be eligible for re-election for one additional term.
The Board’s responsibilities include but are not limited to:
a) Reviewing, offering suggestions for revision, and recommending action on new graduate degree and certificate programs to the Provost.
b) Reviewing, offering suggestions for revision, and recommending action to the Provost on proposals from the academic units for
· changes to graduate programs and degree requirements, and
· changes to graduate curricula.
c) Coordinating external reviews of all graduate programs on a five-year cycle and assessing the outcomes of the visitations.
d) Addressing issues referred to it by the Provost or Directors of Graduate Studies of the academic units.
e) Consulting with the Provost on policies and practices relating to graduate student admission and retention.
f) Consulting with the Provost on policies and practices pertaining to graduate scholarships, financial aid, and employment of graduate students.
g) Consulting with the Provost and the Director of Research and Sponsored Programs on policies relating to research development as they pertain to graduate education.
Substantive motions, involving proposals for new graduate programs or certificates or changes to the degree requirements or for the disbandment or merger of graduate programs must be brought before the Graduate Board. Section 7 describes some exceptions to this requirement.
a) New Graduate Level Programs: There will normally be two meetings to consider such motions.
· At the first meeting, a representative from the unit proposing an action will meet with the Board to go over the document and address any immediate concerns that are raised.
· A subcommittee consisting of at least three members of the Board will be elected to review the proposal and submit their findings to the Board. At the second meeting, members will discuss the findings of this subcommittee and vote on the proposal if there are no substantive concerns remaining.
· When substantive concerns are raised by the subcommittee, the unit proposing the new program will be notified and requested to address these concerns.
· A third meeting will be called to discuss the unit’s response to these concerns. A recommendation to approve the proposal is made only if more than half the voting members of the Board are in favor of the proposal.
· A document (RD 1) titled “Protocol for Approval of New Graduate Programs” provides a more detailed description of the process for new graduate programs. A second document (RD 2) titled “Procedures for Submitting Proposals for Doctoral Degrees at UM-D” and a third document (RD 3) titled “Procedure for Submitting New Masters Programs” are also attached.
b) Changes to Programs and Degree Requirements: There will normally be one or two meetings to consider motions on changes to programs and degree requirements.
· At the first meeting, a representative from the unit proposing an action will meet with the Board to go over the document and address any immediate concerns that are raised. If there are no substantive concerns, the Board members will vote on the proposal.
· In the event of substantive concerns, the proposing unit will be requested to address these concerns and revise the proposal. A second meeting of the Board is called to discuss and vote on the revised proposal. A recommendation to approve the proposal is made only if more than half the voting members of the Board are in favor of the proposal.
· If the graduate programs are offered through Rackham, any revision to the programs will require approval by the Executive Board of Rackham.
· Reference Document (RD 4) titled “Making Changes to Existing Graduate Programs,” adapted from current Rackham procedures, is attached to this document.
c) External Review of Existing Programs: The graduate chair of a program that has undergone an external review will be invited to attend the Board meeting and discuss the report of the external reviewers.
· The graduate chair will be asked to respond to the external review and to present to the Board actions to be taken to address the reviewers’ recommendations for enhancing the quality of the program. The members of the Board vote to accept the review and the response from the program chair. Acceptance of the report and the unit’s response requires a simple majority of the members present at the meeting.
· The external review report together with the response from the program faculty is forwarded to the Provost. This report is also sent to the Rackham Graduate School, if the graduate program is a Rackham program.
· A document (RD 5) titled “Internal Guidelines for Review of Existing Graduate Programs” is attached to this report.
d) Procedural motions: Procedural motions involving changes to policies on instruction, advising and counseling, admissions and retention of graduate students etc. may be approved by a simple majority of the members present at the meeting.
e) Student participation: Student members of the board shall recuse themselves from deliberations involving issues pertaining to individual students like the awarding of scholarships, financial aid, and admission and graduation requirements.
Quorum requirements are met if at least 7 of the voting members are present.
7. Meetings, Agenda and Minutes
Meetings are held monthly during September through May. Meetings may be called during the June-August period if substantive issues arise that must be handled expeditiously. Agendas should be prepared and distributed at least two working days prior to the meeting. Minutes of the Board for the previous meeting will be distributed and approved during the current meeting.
In the event of persistent difficulties in convening a face-to-face meeting of the regular Board during the summer months, deliberations and voting will be conducted via conference calls or e-mail exchanges. During this period, duly elected alternate members may be delegated to serve for those regular members who are unable to participate in the deliberations.
Routine issues involving minor modifications to program curricula or policies may be handled by the chair of the Board during the summer term when convening a meeting of the Board becomes infeasible. Input from the Board members will be sought by e-mail before the chair acts on pending issues of this nature.
8. Amendments to Policies and Procedures
Changes to this document may only be made with the approval of the Senior Officers of the Campus and the Council of Deans (COD). The Faculty Senate and the members of the Graduate Board will be consulted and requested to provide their feedback on proposed changes before any formal action by the Senior Officers and COD is taken.
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS AND LINKS
- Protocol for Approval of New Graduate Programs
- Procedures for Submitting Proposals for Doctoral Programs at UM-D
- Procedure for Submitting New Masters Programs
- Making Changes to Existing Graduate Programs
- Internal Guidelines for Review of Existing Graduate Programs
- Rackham Requirements for Master's Degrees
Reference Document 1 (RD 1)
Protocol for Approval of New Graduate Programs
1. PREPARATION – A draft of the new degree proposal is prepared within the discipline/department. Decide if you want your program approved by the Rackham Graduate School or if it will be a U of M-Dearborn program only. The proposal format will be different depending on this decision.
2. REVIEWS – (allow six to nine months for this process)
· Review and approval within the discipline/department.
· Send to dean for review and presentation to the school/college administrative council, executive committee, and any other appropriate groups.
· Present to the governing faculty within the school/college for discussion and a vote. Once approved, send to the director of graduate studies (currently the Provost).
· The Provost will send the proposal to the Council of Dean members one week prior to its appearance on the agenda for review. The dean of the school/college requesting the new program will be asked to present the program. They may invite another unit representative if they desire. If numerous revisions are necessary, the COD may request to review the proposal again before endorsing it.
· The Provost will then send the proposal to the Graduate Board members for review two weeks prior to their monthly meeting. The procedure followed by the Graduate Board is described in section 5 of the document “Policies and Procedures for the Graduate Board.”
· If the program is to be a Rackham program, it is suggested that you contact Rackham officials as early as possible to begin discussing your program. Once the Dearborn Graduate Board approves the proposal, the Provost will send the proposals to the Rackham Graduate Board for review. It takes six to eight weeks or more to go through their review process. This board meets September through April only. New proposals with an effective date of Fall term (Sept. 1) should be submitted to no later than December of the year prior to ensure time to complete the review/approval process.
· Once the U of M-Dearborn and/or Rackham Graduate Board approve the proposal, the Provost will do a final review, make minor revisions as needed, and then send the document to the Presidents’ Council Academic Affairs Officers (AOO) Committee for review. This group meets four times a year. They have a specific format that they request be followed for submission. The Graduate Office can assist in the preparation of the document to meet their standards.
· It should be noted that a site visit from the Higher Learning Commission is required for new doctoral degree programs.
3. FINAL APPROVAL - When AAO approves the program, a Regents Communiqué is sent to the University Regents for their approval. The Provost's Office, with assistance from the program director, will prepare the communiqué.
4. MARKETING - Once the Regents approve the program, then marketing and administering of the program may begin.
Revised on January 30, 2009
Reference Document 2 (RD 2)
Procedures for Submitting Proposals for Doctoral Programs
The procedure for obtaining approval for doctoral programs by the UM-D Graduate Board is divided into two parts. The first part, the Preliminary Proposal, is intended to establish need and capacity to offer the proposed degree. Ideally, the UM-D Graduate Board would approve the Preliminary Proposal prior to development of a full proposal. The second part is the Proposal itself.
1. Need for the program
· demonstration of community need
· projected enrollment and rationale
· description of value added to the community, proposing unit(s) and campus
· description of similar programs at local institutions, if any
2. Documentation of ability to offer proposed program
· sufficient numbers of qualified, research active faculty
· financial and human resources needed to launch and support program
· grant or other support for graduate student stipends
· sufficient student workspace
· availability of necessary equipment and instrumentation, if applicable
· based on existing strengths
· department(s)/unit(s) support for program library resources
- Description of relationship/impact of proposed program
· to existing undergraduate and graduate programs
· on teaching (including course load)
· on research
· on community and region served by UM-D
- Program administration
· Director of program: How chosen? Who is eligible?
· Graduate program committee: How chosen? Who is eligible? How many? What is committee role/responsibility?
· Student advisement: Who advises students? What is the structure of the student advising committee?
· Student support: Fellowships? Other financial support?
· Administrative assistance: Who will provide secretarial assistance?
· Technical support: Who will provide technical support and equipment maintenance?
· Space for administration: Need for and location of space for offices
The complete proposal should follow the guidelines described in the documents cited below:
· Rackham Graduate School: Proposing New Graduate Programs or Altering Existing Programs (Revised September, 1997) distributed by the Rackham School of Graduate Studies, and
· Graduate Student Handbook published annually by the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies.
· The leaders of units developing proposals for new graduate programs are also recommended to familiarize themselves with the document titled “Presidents Council Policy Statement and Procedures for Reviewing Academic Programs.”
In addition, if the research is to be conducted off-campus, for example in an industrial laboratory, the proposal should include a description of resources that would be used. The proposal should also contain a discussion of how intellectual property rights will be addressed. For example, will a student conducting research in a non-university location be able to publish his/her research?
Finally, the assessment of the program should be thoroughly addressed. The proposal should describe the educational goals for the student and for the faculty and should indicate how achievement of those goals will be ascertained or measured.
Revised August 1, 2008
Reference Document 3 (RD 3)
Procedure for Submitting New Masters Programs
For development of a new master’s degree, the proposal should outline the following content. This information applies to all Masters’ degrees at UMD, including the M.A., M.S., M.P.P., M.S.F., M.S.A., M.S.E., M.B.A., M.P.A., and M.Ed. The following adheres to the model suggested by the Presidents Council.
3. Related Programs
· At University of Michigan-Dearborn
· At other local institutions
· Admissions Requirements
· Degree Requirements
· Core and Elective Courses
6. New Courses
7. Projected Enrollment
8. Scheduling Plans
9. Program Costs
10. Available/Needed Equipment
11. Program Administration/Faculty
12. Internal Status of Proposal
13. Planned Implementation
14. Library and Other Learning Resources
16. Accreditation Requirements
Required Appendices: Letters of support, course descriptions, list(s) of faculty, etc.
NOTE: For programs that are to be offered through Rackham, you must also follow the checklist for revising and creating Rackham Graduate School Programs (Reference Document RD 6). The leaders of units developing proposals for new graduate programs are also recommended to familiarize themselves with the document titled “Presidents Council Policy Statement and Procedures for Reviewing Academic Programs.”
Revised August 1,, 2008
Reference Document 4 (RD 4)
Making Changes to Existing Graduate Programs**
Leaders of programs undertaking curricular modifications, even minor ones, should consult with the Graduate Board. The Provost needs to be advised of all changes in order to assure that up-to-date information is available to those who conduct degree audits and is reflected in all publications and on appropriate web sites. Some changes also merit close review. Approval from the Rackham Executive Board is required for Rackham Graduate School Programs.
1. Minor changes
The procedure to follow depends upon the nature of the changes involved. In straightforward cases (assuming the result continues to meet all Rackham regulations), the review will be undertaken by the chair of the Graduate Board and a formal notification/approval will be provided by the Provost. This category would include such changes as:
- requiring a new core course in place of an old one;
- changes in other required courses (that do not result in a change in the total credit hours required);
- minor changes recommended from an external review or to meet changing accreditation requirements;
- a revision in cognate requirements (so long as they continue to meet Rackham requirements for Rackham programs); and
- changes in thesis/capstone project requirements.
2. Substantive changes
Changes that fundamentally affect the scope or nature of the program are reviewed in more detail. Approval for such changes will require formal approval by the Graduate Board and a notification of approval by the Provost. Section 5 of the document entitles “Policies and Procedure for the Graduate Board” describes the process in greater detail. This approach is needed when:
- the number of credit hours required is increased or decreased;
- the change would provide half or more of the instruction being delivered through on-line learning;
- the change would result in extended time to degree for any reason;
- the change reflects a fundamental change in the mission or focus of the program.
**The procedure described here has been adopted from the document titled “Checklist for Revising and Creating Rackham Graduate School Programs.”
Revised August 1,, 2008
Reference Document 5 (RD 5)
Internal Guidelines for Review of Existing Graduate Programs
FREQUENCY: Reviews are conducted every five (5) years.
The purpose of a Graduate Program Review is to identify the goals of the program and to assess its success in meeting these goals. Assessment is based on academic criteria. Reviews should help determine the strengths and weaknesses of the program and should include recommendations for improvement of the program. They also provide a basis for setting academic priorities in resource allocation within the school/college. A program review is an opportunity for programs to evaluate past achievements, current status and future directions with the benefit of the support and involvement of the Provost, the Graduate Board, the dean of the unit, external reviewers from the field and, for Rackham programs, the Rackham School of Graduate Studies. Graduate programs that are reviewed for accreditation by a national accrediting body may use these reviews as the official full review with prior approval of the Provost/Director of Graduate Studies.
In conducting a self-study, the internal review committee should consider the quality of faculty including adjuncts; quality of students; quality and currency of curriculum and congruence with national standards; quality of administration of program; productivity of program; value of degree including opinions of alumni and employers; relevance of program to local, regional, and national needs; relationship of program to unit's strategic plan; and adequacy of resources available to the program.
- The Provost sends a memorandum on or before September 1 to the program director to initiate the program review. In January preceding formal notification, the program director will be notified informally that a review is to be conducted in the academic year.
- An Internal Review Committee, normally consisting of Program Committee members plus a few external members, is appointed by the dean. The committee prepares a self-study report that is sent to the dean who then forwards it to the Provost.
- The Provost, in consultation with the dean of the school/college and the Internal Review Committee, appoints two external evaluators who are considered leaders in the field. The Dean of Rackham is requested to appoint a reviewer for Rackham-affiliated programs. The Provost sends the self-study report with a formal invitation letter to the external evaluators. Ideally, this should be accomplished by the end of February.
- The Provost’s Office coordinates the date of the review with the reviewers, the Provost, the Dean and the Graduate Program Committee Director. Ideally, the external review should occur in March.
- The agenda/schedule for the external review visit and travel arrangements for the evaluators is coordinated by the program director. The agenda for the visit should include meetings with administrators, faculty, school and cognate areas, Graduate Board members, students, alumni and employers. The external evaluators give both an oral and a preliminary written report to the Provost at the end of the visit. The evaluators’ final report should be submitted to the Provost within one month after the visit. A written evaluation template customized to each unit will be sent to the reviewers along with the self-study report.
- The Internal Review Committee and the dean of the unit will be asked to respond to the external evaluators’ report, recommendations and observations.
- A complete report consists of the self-study, the external evaluators’ report, and the responses of the Internal Review Committee and the dean. Ideally, these reports should be submitted to the Provost within one month of receipt of the external reviewers’ report.
- The complete report is submitted to the Graduate Board for review and discussion. The program director will be invited to a Graduate Board meeting for this discussion. The Board forwards the complete report together with its comments to the Provost.
- The Provost submits a full report with comments and recommendations to the Dean of the Rackham Graduate School for Rackham-approved programs. For Dearborn programs, the Provost responds to the dean.
Revised August 1, 2008
Reference Document 6 (RD 6)
Rackham Master's Degrees
There are two sections regarding master's degrees. The first part describes requirements and procedures for master's degrees, as outlined in Chapter 2 of the Rackham Graduate School Academic Policies (http://www.rackham.umich.edu/policies/article/gsh/). The second part of the section on master's degrees outlines the content, format, and process for developing new degrees. This information applies to all master's degrees in Rackham, including the M.A., M.S., M.U.P., M.F.A., M.S.E., M.S.I., M.L.A., M.P.A., M.P.P.
(Section 2.2 of the Rackham Graduate School Academic Policies)
Rackham offers some terminal master's degree programs, and also awards master's degrees as part of doctoral programs. The latter are awarded to students as they complete requirements for the doctorate.
Credits earned before admission will not automatically be applied toward master's degree requirements, and must be reviewed by both the department/program and by Rackham. Students may apply for dual degree (section 2.4) and certificate of graduate study programs (section 2.3) but may not propose a student-initiated single-degree master's program.
Effective for those entering in the Fall 2007 term, a student in a terminal master's program is expected to complete all work within five years from the date of first enrollment in the program. Students exceeding this time limit must file a petition for modification or waiver of regulation (http://rackham.umich.edu/OARD/pdf/petition.pdf) with Rackham OARD. Petitions must describe explicitly the amount of work remaining and a timeline for completion. A student who fails to complete degree requirements within five years may be withdrawn and required to apply for readmission (section 1.3.7).
Master's students must complete at least one-half of the minimum required credit hours on the home campus, i.e., the campus on which the degree program is administered. Rackham does not require that these credits be concentrated in a certain number of terms, but individual programs may have such a requirement. Courses taken on a visited (audited) basis do not fulfill the residency requirement.
Master's degrees require between 24 and 60 credit hours of graduate-level course work, depending on the graduate program. Transfer credits must be approved by the student's program and by Rackham OARD (section 1.2.2), and must be officially listed on the University transcript to be counted toward this requirement. No 990, 995 or other course with "doctoral," "dissertation," or "preliminary" in the title may be counted toward a master's degree. Visited (audited) courses may not be counted.
Rackham recognizes the value of intellectual breadth in graduate education, and the importance of formal graduate study in areas beyond the student's field of specialization. Cognate courses are those that are in a discipline or area different from a student's field of study, but are related or connected with some aspect of this field. Cognate coursework must be approved by the department or program, and may be satisfied in three ways:
a. By completing 4 credit hours of cognate coursework in approved graduate-level courses with a grade of B- or better (departments or programs may have additional cognate requirements).
b. By using coursework within the same department or program but in a subfield different from the student's own. A course in a student's program that is cross-listed as a course in another program may satisfy the cognate requirement. In this case, the department or program should notify Rackham OARD.
c. By using credit officially transferred from another institution (section 1.2.2) in another field of study.
d. By completing graduate coursework at another institution that meets the expectation of the cognate requirement without officially transferring the credit to the transcript. The student must provide Rackham OARD with an official transcript, including the courses and credit hours, and the department or program should notify Rackham OARD. These courses do not apply toward the minimum requirement for the degree, and do not appear on the University transcript.
Additional program requirements. In various fields of specialization, master's programs may specify additional requirements. These may include additional graduate level coursework, reading knowledge of a foreign language, work-experience or practicums, thesis or research essay, and/or a final oral or written examination.
As is the case for doctoral degrees, each new master's degree proposal minimally includes six sections.
Different programs have different justifications. The following are examples of the kinds of information that would be useful when formulating a rationale for a program.
a. If the master's program also includes a doctoral degree, the relationship of the master's to the doctorate, either in course or as a "consolation" award for students who do not complete the doctorate, should be described.
b. The intellectual and societal need for the program should be described.
c. Evidence of an academic or market demand for program graduates is critical.
d. Are there similar degrees offered at other universities? How will this degree be distinctive? How are other programs structured?
e. What distinctive advantages follow from the creation of a new program as compared to the revision or supplementation of existing graduate programs?
A complete overview of the programs content is needed, to include:
a. A list of required courses, noting distribution requirements and relevant electives, listed by number and title and with a brief description of each. Each course must have been approved by the relevant unit or units, and for each course the teaching faculty should be identified.
b. A sample program is needed, showing a typical student's course of study and progress through the program, including the expected time needed to completion. It is understood that each student's program will be different and the model program is not the only way students will be able to fulfill degree requirements. However, if there are any roadblocks for students wishing to take these courses, they should be noted.
c. Mechanisms to be used for milestones (final exams, capstone projects, theses) should be outlined.
d. Provisions for required work experience, fieldwork, internships, teaching, or practica should be described.
e. Language or research methods requirements, if any, should be specified.
f. Any specialized equipment, laboratories, etc., that are already available or that need to be established/purchased should be noted.
g. Any requirements mandated by an accrediting agency, particularly as they affect the curriculum, should be noted.
h. Provisions the program will make for academic mentoring and career counseling should be addressed. Explicit mechanisms to be used for complete, effective advising should be outlined.
i. The proposal should specify the criteria the program will use in admitting students and the process to be followed. Will the GRE be required?
j. How will a sense of community (involving both students and faculty) be developed and maintained?
k. Program quality must be assessed. The proposal should include information on how the program will be evaluated and revised. It is routinely expected that any new program, after a few years of experience, will be subject to revision by the participating faculty. New programs will also become part of the rotating Rackham Program Review process and be assessed thoroughly once every four years.
The success of any program depends upon faculty who are committed to the enterprise.
a. Describe the names and rank (and tenure status) of available faculty and the number of any new faculty required to mount the program over the next five years. If current faculty strength is not adequate to mount the program, the proposal must note how the necessary additional resources will be made available to hire or recruit additional faculty and must have documented commitments from the dean (or other appropriate sources) supporting that growth. Evidence is needed that participating faculty can devote the time to assure timely sequencing of courses and wish to devote the time to assure sufficient student advising. The Rackham Executive Board review process has no role in the commitment of existing or new resources, and its approval of a graduate program does not commit any allocation of resources or endorsement of need.
b. How will faculty roles in administration, teaching and counseling be handled? The description should address the formation, composition and duties of the program's graduate chair and its faculty governance arrangements.
c. Describe the availability of funds and faculty time to support teaching, curriculum development, program administration, recruiting and admissions, and student advising and mentoring.
d. A clear indication is needed that listed faculty have indicated that they can and will take the time required to participate in the new program.
a. Enrollment goals and planning are important aspects of managing an academic program. The proposal should address the initial enrollment goals and the process by which cohort size will be evaluated and revised over time. Explicit discussion is also needed regarding whether the program's students are expected to represent incremental growth in Rackham enrollments or whether the program will draw students who would otherwise enroll in another, existing Rackham program.
b. Diversity in graduate enrollment is desired. International students are welcome and effort should be undertaken to include U.S. citizens who meet one or more of the following criteria: (A) come from an educational, cultural, geographic or socioeconomic background that is underrepresented in graduate study in their discipline in the United States or at the University of Michigan; (B) have demonstrated commitment to diversity in the academic, professional, or civic realm through their research interests, work experience, volunteer engagement, or leadership of student or community organizations; (C) have experienced financial hardship as a result of family economic circumstances; (D) are first generation U.S. citizens or are the first generation in their families to graduate from a four year college.
The approximate number of applicants and enrollees expected each year must be noted. Long term growth, if anticipated, should be discussed. Further, cohort size should relate to job market forecasts and available funding for student support. Proposals routinely overestimate the likely interest, both initially and in the long run, based on inquiries and anecdotal evidence more than careful analyses. To the extent possible, cohort size and program growth should be based on clear evidence of student interest and the likely long term job market. This section should also address to what extent and in what ways the demand for graduates of the program is different from that for holders of other U-M degrees. Care should be taken to assure that new demands do not lessen the job prospects of students graduating from other programs.
Proposals should also address the following matters that have resource implications, bearing in mind that the Rackham Executive Board focuses on the academic program, its intellectual merits, and the plans for its adequate support. The Executive Board approval does not constitute or imply a commitment of any funds. Therefore the Board needs to be assured that adequate resources will be available to support a high quality program.
a. Student Funding: How well and through what mechanisms will students be supported? The proposal should specify departmental funds, training grants, fellowships, faculty grants and contracts and GSI or GSRA appointments that will be available for graduate support. Any such expected support must be firmly committed by the unit or individual controlling the funds. The proposal should distinguish between the support that is needed and the commitments that have been made, detailing how necessary additional support will be garnered. If graduate student funding depends on external research support, the proposal should include information on the predicted continuation of this level of funding over time and on the provisions that have been made for student support in the case of uncertainty or disruption in the expected support.
b. Space and Equipment: Describe the funding and provision of any needed space, laboratories, or equipment.
c. Program Funding: If the activities related to the program bear costs, including personnel expenses for support staff, a budget should be developed as a part of the proposal. The budget should outline the expected annual program expense and detail the sources of support to cover them, identifying both start-up costs and recurring operating needs. Firm commitments from the unit or individual in control of resources are needed when the program relies on incremental allocations of funds or the reallocation of existing funds from other activities.