The academic review process is designed to ensure the quality and continuous improvement of McGill’s academic programs and units. It is designed to be flexible, accountable, and responsive to the needs of the McGill community.
Reviews are carried out in accordance with policies of the Bureau de Coopération Interuniversitaire (BCI) and international best practices. The process is overseen by the Office of Academic Reviews and governed by McGill’s Regulations on Academic Reviews.
Read the Regulations and Procedures on academic reviews
The review process
- Each year, Deans collaborate with the OAR to decide which programs or units will be reviewed.
- Timelines vary depending on type and needs, but a full review must be conducted at least every 10 years.
- A Review Committee is established for each review, reporting to the Provost and Executive Vice-President (Academic).
Components of the review process include:
- A Self-Study Report (confidential) prepared by the unit/program under review
- A Review Committee Report (confidential) which outlines recommendations arising out of the review.
- A Faculty Action Plan (publicly available) documenting the Faculty’s assessment of the Review Committee Report and plans to address the committee’s recommendations.
- Following their review, Faculties will be asked to provide regular progress reports to the Academic Policy Committee to report on the implementation of their action plan.
Read the full Procedures on Academic Reviews.
Review criteria
The following criteria should be addressed, as appropriate, through the review process. These criteria may be adapted to meet the needs of the Faculties.
- Objectives, priorities, and activities
- Research, scholarship, and creative work (as applicable)
- Academic programs, teaching, and learning (as applicable)
- Alignment with broader University priorities, good governance, and community engagement
Learn more about the review criteria (Regulations)
Types of reviews
Regular reviews may be conducted at the level of the unit, program, or group of programs, as well as for research centres, academic administrative units and offsite academic or research facilities.
Deans may choose between a full or streamlined reviews.
| Review type | Full | Streamlined |
|---|---|---|
| Level of review | Unit Program / group of programs Research centre Academic administrative unit Offsite academic facility Offsite research facility | Unit Program / group of programs Research centre Academic administrative unit Online program New program |
| Frequency | At least every 10 years | Every 3 – 5 years |
| Meets BCI requirements? | ✔️ | |
| External reviewers required? | ✔️ | |
| Site visit | ✔️ | |
| Stakeholder meeting | ✔️ | |
| Self-Study Report length | ~20 - 30 pages | ~10 - 15 pages |
| Review Committee Report length | ~12 - 15 pages | ~3 - 5 pages |
| Faculty Action Plan published? | ✔️ | ✔️ |
Office of Academic Reviews
The Office of Academic Reviews is responsible for overseeing and administering the academic review process in collaboration with academic unit heads.
Contact us if you have any questions about the process or an upcoming review.