Patterns of Program Discontinuance: a Comparative Analysis of State Agency Procedures for Initiating and Implementing the Discontinuance of Academic Programs.

The call to discontinue qualitatively and quantitatively underproductive academic instructional programs in our universities is pervasive. After years of extensive program proliferation and the continuous expectation of incremental growth in state funding, the socio-economic and demographic conditions warranting curricular expansion have ceased to exist: the predictions for public four-year and graduate institutions for the 1980's range from a steady state to possible decreases in enrollment and public funds appropriations. While much attention has been placed on the institutional issues of terminating academic programs, relatively little research has been geared toward assessing and evaluating the role and efforts of state agencies for higher education in this area. The findings presented here reflect the perspective of state agencies only. Addressed are the following general issues: (a) Determining the extent to which state agencies for higher education are involved in discontinuing academic programs in public four-year and graduate institutions; (b) Analyzing the state of the art of terminating programs as currently practiced on the state level; (c) Identifying specific phenomena--such as incentives, obstacles, coping mechanisms, particular processes--which may be contributing to making program discontinuance a constructive endeavor; and (d) Stating recommendations and proposing future research projects which would assist in modifying and /or reducing academic curricula in the 1980's. A survey research methodology was chosen to accommodate all states interested in participating. All state governing and coordinating agencies in the nation were invited to participate. The directors or executive academic officers of participating state agencies were interviewed by telephone. The responses can be divided into four state agencies declining and 46 state agencies agreeing to participate in the telephone survey. The research was exploratory, the questions and methodology were based on reviewing directly and indirectly related literature. The analyses were based primarily on the information received through the interviews with 46 agency officials. Questions focused on the formal and informal authority state agencies have regarding program discontinuance, a group of process characteristics, program discontinuance impact and success indicators, and on obstacles encountered and coping mechanisms employed to overcome hindrances. Secondly, supplementary information was extrapolated from written documents sent by the respondents. It was found that 32 states currently are actively involved in recommending, initiating, and /or implementing program discontinuance. During the analysis and interpretation stage, special attention was given to identifying: first, characteristics in the process which seem to contribute to constructive impact; second, obstacles which tend to prevent effective closure implementation; and , third, coping mechanisms which seem to help in overcoming obstacles in the program discontinuance process. A conceptual coping process model was developed. Definitional difficulties were encountered in identifying how many programs had been eliminated during the 1975-1979 period and with what success. A program discontinuance continuum was developed in order to accommodate all program discontinuance activities and variations encountered. The conclusions include recommendations relating to the six identifiable events in the program discontinuance process: initiation, review, decision making, appeal, implementation, and post-decisional assessment. Several potential future research topics are suggested. Particular emphasis is placed on developing the framework for future research on program discontinuance process models. Three such models introduced are: (a) an incremental process model; (b) a transitory process model; and (c) an external intervention process model.PhDHigher educationUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/157792/1/8017320.pd