The Forum Review Panel (FRP) is a volunteer committee that plays a critically important role in The Forum’s Quality Improvement Program (QUIP) by making the Final Determination of whether or not an institution or organization that has undergone a QUIP Review is in substantial conformity with The Forum’s Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad.

Forum Review Panel

Martin Hogan (DIS – Study Abroad in Scandinavia)
Sue Jackson (Whitworth University, retired)
Kim Kreutzer (University of Colorado Boulder, retired)
Michael Steinberg (IES Abroad, retired)
David Shallenberger (SIT Graduate Institute)
Lee Sternberger (James Madison University)
Susan Buck Sutton (IUPUI)

Eligibility Requirements

  • At least 10 years in education abroad and 5 years in a senior leadership role.
  • Completion of or enrollment in The Forum’s Professional Certification Program and demonstrated extensive knowledge and application of the Standards of Good Practice for Education Abroad.
  • Applicable experience in program and/or higher education assessment and evaluation.
  • Need not be from a Forum member institution.
  • May not currently be serving on The Forum Council or The Forum Board of Directors.
  • May not serve as QUIP Peer Reviewers during their tenure on the FRP.

Selection and Appointment

FRP members are nominated by a committee consisting of: Forum QUIP staff members, the Chair of The Forum Council, and a Board member appointed by the Board’s Executive Committee. Based on the recommendations of this FRP nomination committee, FRP members are appointed by The Forum’s President and CEO.

Training

FRP members are required to participate in 2 web-based training sessions of 1.5 hours each. As part of their training, FRP members who are not yet certified education abroad professionals are expected to become certified by completing the Professional Certification Program within one calendar year.

Terms of Service

FRP members will serve for five years and may serve two consecutive terms. The FRP nomination committee will determine if existing FRP members are interested in serving consecutive terms before making a recommendation on inviting the individual to serve a second term. Forum staff will provide information as part of the FRP nomination committee about the performance of FRP members to help to determine whether or not they should be considered for reappointment. This will include an evaluation of the timeliness and thoroughness of the work of FRP members. Peer Reviewers receive a modest honorarium from The Forum in compensation for their service for each Final Determination they deliver.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

Each FRP member must sign a confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement and a conflict of interest disclosure statement for each review to which they are assigned. FRP members will be asked to recuse themselves from any review for which there exists a real or perceived conflict of interest.

Code of Ethics

FRP members must understand and agree to abide by the field’s Code of Ethics for Education Abroad. They must agree also to exemplify high standards of honesty and integrity by maintaining the confidentiality of the QUIP participants, as well as the contents of the QUIP review materials.

Responsibilities of FRP Members

  • Delivery of as many as six Final Determinations per semester;
  • Review of QUIP Interim Reports as needed;
  • Participation in QUIP Appeals Panels as needed;
  • Participation on QUIP Peer Reviewer selection committees as needed.

Operations of the FRP

The FRP is expected to carry out its work via e-mail and conference call. Occasional face-to-face meetings may be convened as necessary but are not anticipated.

The FRP is charged with reviewing the materials produced in conjunction with each QUIP Review. For each review, two FRP members will each read the Self-Study Report, the Peer Review Report, and any responses that the organization under review has submitted. The FRP members offer their judgment as to whether the materials submitted provide evidence that the organization is in substantial conformity with the Standards of Good Practice.

If the two FRP readers agree, a Final Determination Letter will be sent to the organization indicating the result of the review.  If there is disagreement, a third FRP reader will be assigned as the tie-breaking vote.

The actual Final Determination Letter will be issued in writing, by The Forum President and CEO, and sent via email, by The Forum staff. The names of FRP members are not shared with the organization under review.

The Final Determination Letter will refer to the Peer Review Report and any recommendations and requirements for quality improvement included in it. FRP members may also suggest the inclusion of additional suggestions, recommendations, and requirements for improvement. In the case where the FRP members agree that an organization is not in substantial conformity with the Standards, a Final Determination Letter will indicate to the organization the recommendations and requirements for improvement, and a suggestion that it participate in a follow-up QUIP Review when it has addressed the areas in need of improvement.

 

Apply Now