1 / 27

Opportunities to Enhance Quality at EKU

Opportunities to Enhance Quality at EKU. Quick Overview. Changes in the Accreditation Process SACS to reaffirm EKU accreditation in 2007 5-Year Review (new in this reaffirmation cycle. SACS returns in 5 years to review the QEP). Dual Focus of the SACS Review. Compliance Review

tad-pena
Télécharger la présentation

Opportunities to Enhance Quality at EKU

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Opportunities to Enhance Quality at EKU

  2. Quick Overview • Changes in the Accreditation Process • SACS to reaffirm EKU accreditation in 2007 • 5-Year Review (new in this reaffirmation cycle. SACS returns in 5 years to review the QEP)

  3. Dual Focus of the SACS Review Compliance Review Quality Enhancement

  4. Compliance Review • Principles of Accreditation – “integrity and commitment to quality enhancement” • Core Requirements • Comprehensive Standards • Federal Requirements

  5. Compliance Review Process • Review of the Compliance documents • Compliance Committee Co-Chairs: • Rich Boyle, Gary Kuhnhenn, and Sherry Robinson • Leadership Team: • Byron Bond, Jim Chapman, Joanne Glasser, KeithJohnson, Jaleh Rezaie, Aaron Thompson, andVirginia Underwood • Final format • Mock Review

  6. Time-line for the Reaffirmation Process • Submission of Compliance report (Sept. 8, 2006) • Off-Site Review (Nov. 6 – 9, 2006) • Focused Report (by Feb. 27, if necessary) • Submit QEP (Feb. 27, 2007 ) • On-Site Review (April 10 – 12, 2007) • Commission’s final Decision (Dec. 2007) • 5-year report

  7. Why is SACS Concerned with Learning? Click HERE to play video clip (approx 5 minutes)

  8. QEP Developed by the institution describing a course of action for institutional improvement that addresses an issue or issues CRITICAL TO ENHANCING EDUCUATIONAL QUALITY AND DIRECTLY RELATED TO STUDENT LEARNING.

  9. QEPing awound. . . So what is the QEP?

  10. VISION of the QEP Committee The QEP will significantly change the students’ learning experience at EKU

  11. Mission Oversee the development, preparation and submission of a QEP that will result in long-term improvement of student learning.

  12. Goals • Engage the campus community in developing the theme, focus and description • Analyze context and best practice • Provide implementation plans for programs or initiatives to begin in Fall 2007

  13. Progress on the QEP After faculty, staff and student surveys, chats, and collecting data from a variety of student and faculty assessments the committee arrived at THE THEME

  14. EKU Will Develop Informed, Critical and Creative Thinkers Who Communicate Effectively.

  15. What do we expect of our students as a result of the QEP? • Explore (identify, discover) and use relevant information in order to gain knowledge and solve problems. • Evaluate (analyze) information and ideas using appropriate methods. • Expand (develop) and generate their own ideas. • Express (clearly articulate) a point of view and develop it with awareness of alternatives.

  16. How will we meet this vision? (the “Infrastructure of our QEP”) • A management structure that will assure the effective implementation and coordination of each part of the QEP • A professional development process • Program implementation • An overall assessment of student learning outcomes.

  17. Center for Critical and Creative Thinking

  18. Assessment Student learning will be assessed at multiple levels to demonstrate improvement in the students’ ability to be critical and creative thinkers who communicate effectively.

  19. Professional Development Provide a variety of professional development activities to assure that the university community • is informed about the QEP • is using methods that increase the number of critical and creative thinkers who communicate effectively

  20. Program Implementation • Goals, outcomes and KPI’s in the Strategic Plan for each unit/program • University-wide initiatives • Individual proposals (specific, broad-based initiatives in a course or program) • A process to allow funding for new initiatives through the life of this QEP

  21. University-wide Initiatives • Thinking and Writing across the Curriculum • Transition to College (first year course) • Service Learning • “Studio” Pilot

  22. Individual Initiatives • CACTUS (Citizens' Assembly for Critical Thinking about the United States: An Exercise in Deliberative Democracy) •  Science in Society Project • Athletic Training First Year

  23. Where Are We in the Process? • Subcommittees of the QEP Steering Committee are working on finalizing each part of the infrastructure. (to be reviewed by the University in Fall 2006) • Seeking input from various administrative groups.

  24. Where Do We Go Next? • Communicate feedback on plan and budget to the program/proposal designers. • Revise the drafts based on feedback. • Complete the written description of the QEP. • Second draft out to the University Community for review and feedback. • Third draft and final draft complete and submitted to SACS by January 2007.

  25. April 2007 • Meet with SACS on-site team to • Share our QEP • Answer questions • Receive feedback Fall 2007 Begin the implementation of the QEP programs!

  26. What We Need from You? • Develop a thorough understanding of the QEP. Understand how the initiatives affects students, faculty and staff. • Assist in informing and energizing the university community. • Meet with SACS team in April to discuss the QEP.

  27. What Do You Need from Us? ??? • In order to support the efforts of the QEP designers? • In order to discuss the QEP with others at EKU and with the SACS review team? ???

More Related