1 / 10

Initial Accreditation Success Stories: What Worked

Initial Accreditation Success Stories: What Worked . Doug Grider - University of Arkansas Fort Smith John Burbridge – Elon University David Martin – Alfred University. Three Journeys to Success. Widely different institutions Different faculty resources and composition

red
Télécharger la présentation

Initial Accreditation Success Stories: What Worked

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. Initial Accreditation Success Stories: What Worked Doug Grider - University of Arkansas Fort Smith John Burbridge – Elon University David Martin – Alfred University

  2. Three Journeys to Success • Widely different institutions • Different faculty resources and composition • Different administrations and support • Different management styles • Different approaches to meeting standards

  3. One Size Doesn’t Fit All • Same outcome • External peer review confirmation of program quality • AACSB accreditation success • Conclusion: You can achieve accreditation by adapting your programs and processes to meet the standards requirements.

  4. Lander University • Rural University • 3000 students • Predominantly Undergraduate Programs • Primarily a teaching university • Strong Liberal Arts history • Professional schools of Business, Education, Nursing • Strong programs in Science, Math, PEES

  5. School of Business Profile - 2004 • 500 students • 16 full-time faculty • 2 Administrative Assistants • Excellent facilities and learning environment • Strong technology for faculty, students, and classrooms • Excellent community support • Positive image on campus • Highly productive faculty • Strong curriculum • Positive vision for future • Aggressive strategic plan

  6. Where we came from • Fall 1999 • 379 students • 13 full-time faculty • Low self esteem • Questionable image on campus • Limited technology availability • Limited scholarly productivity • Adequate curriculum but in silos • Inconsistent application of governing policies • Reasonable Accreditation plan

  7. What we Did • Revised Mission to focus on High Quality • Revised the weighting System for faculty evaluation –required activity in each area • Stimulated scholarly productivity • Revised and increased admission standards • Enforced pre-requisite controls to build quality

  8. continued • Reviewed, revised, revamped curriculum • Stressed need for & importance of outcome measures of success, e.g. MFAT • Invested heavily in technology for faculty and students • Worked to build positive image and self-esteem. Placed emphasis on student academic achievement and faculty accomplishment.

  9. continued • Emphasized and built faculty cohesiveness while maintaining high degree of diversity (gender, racial, geographic, and academic) • Initiated shift to AOL standards; Developed innovative out-of-class learning and development program for students • Shifted focus to extension and growth

  10. Questions

More Related