1 / 25

Your Name Class Name

Your Name Class Name. Who is SACS-COC?. The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges is the regional body for the accreditation of degree-granting higher education institutions in the Southern states. Paradigm Shift. Learner-Centered Instruction.

zenda
Télécharger la présentation

Your Name Class Name

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. Your Name Class Name

  2. Who is SACS-COC? • The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges is the regional body for the accreditation of degree-granting higher education institutions in the Southern states.

  3. Paradigm Shift Learner-Centered Instruction Professor-Centered Instruction

  4. Evolution of Campus Assessment Attitudes • Denial: It’s a fad. If I ignore it, it will go away. • Acceptance: Okay. I guess we have to do it. • Resistance: I feel threatened. My department feels threatened. Can I subvert it by not participating in the process or in some other way? • Understanding: Maybe we can learn something useful. Can we use what we’ve already been doing? • Campaign: We have a plan. Maybe it’s not perfect, but let’s get moving! • Collaboration: We have a plan with long-range objectives that are clearly defined, and, based on our experience with assessment, we believe it works. • Institutionalization: We can’t imagine working without assessment. It’s a permanent part of our institutional culture (Allen, 2004).

  5. Why do we need SACSCOC accreditation? • The Feds require it—otherwise no funding • UH System Board of Regents requires it • THECB requires data that parallels SACS data • Grant applications require it • Marketing relies on it

  6. Internal Benefits of the Reaffirmation Process • Through Reaffirmation 2014 we will: • Review our goals, programs, and services to determine the extent to which they reflect our mission • Evaluate the effectiveness of our programs, operations, and services • Strive for a level of performance that moves us beyond the status quo • Establish databases to provide ongoing documentation of our continuous improvement • Recognize accreditation as an ongoing rather than an episodic event • Develop a QEP that will make a significant impact on student learning • Strengthen the involvement of all members of the UHV community • Demonstrate our accountability to constituents and the public

  7. Documents of the Reaffirmation Process • Institutional Summary Form • Compliance Certificate • Quality Enhancement Plan • Focused Report • Institutional Profiles

  8. Steps in the Reaffirmation Process Phase 1: Preparation Step 1: The Orientation Meeting . Commission staff conduct an Orientation Meeting for UHV’s Institutional Leadership Team. June 4, 2012 Atlanta, GA Step 2: Advisory Visit. An optional consultation after the Orientation Meeting. May be a conference call or in-person.

  9. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 2: Off-Site Review Step 3: Compliance Certificate. Institutional Effectiveness Steering Committee prepares and submits our Compliance Certificate and supporting documentation. September 10, 2013

  10. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 2: Off-Site Review Step 4: Off-Site Review and Report. SACS examiners remotely review our Compliance Certificate and meet to finalize the report of their findings.

  11. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 2: Off-Site Review Step 5: Review of the Report. The Institutional Leadership Team receives the SACS report and discusses it with the examiners via conference call.

  12. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 3: On-Site Review Step 6: Materials for the Committee. The Institutional Effectiveness Steering Committee sends the Compliance Certificate, the Focused Report, and the Quality Enhancement Plan to the Commission and to the On-Site Reaffirmation Committee. December, 2013

  13. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 3: On-Site Review Step 7: On-Site Visit and Report. The On-Site Reaffirmation Committee visits UHV to evaluate and determine the acceptability of the QEP, to review areas of non-compliance in the Compliance Certificate and review any other concerns. Spring 2014

  14. Steps of the Reaffirmation Process Phase 4: Board of Trustees Review Step 8: Response to the Visiting Committee Report. UHV responds to the reports of the Reaffirmation Committee. Step 9: Board of Trustees Review. After a review of the Report of the Reaffirmation Committee, the QEP, and UHV’s response, the SACS Board of Trustees takes action on UHV’s reaffirmation. December 2014

  15. Our First Major Task • Compliance Certificate -- is a document completed by the institution that demonstrates its judgment of the extent of its compliance with each of the Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Requirements (SACSCOC, 2010). • Provides documentation for • The Principle of Integrity • 16 Core Requirements • 75 Comprehensive Standards • 7 Federal Requirements • Around 500 pages

  16. Institutional Effectiveness • Core Requirement 2.5 The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that (1) incorporate a systematic review of institutional mission, goals, and outcomes; (2) result in continuing improvement in institutional quality; and (3) demonstrate the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. (Institutional Effectiveness)

  17. Institutional Effectiveness • Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 The institution identifies expected outcomes, assess the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results in each of the following areas: (Institutional Effectiveness) • 3.3.1.1 educational programs, to include student learning outcomes • 3.3.1.2 administrative support services • 3.3.1.3 educational support services • 3.3.1.4 research within its educational mission • 3.3.1.5 community/public service within its educational mission

  18. UHV Mission

  19. What’s Been Done So Far: Compliance Certificate • OIE has been established • Institutional Leadership Team is identified • Time lines for program assessment and the Reaffirmation Process have been established • Software packages reviewed. • Met with assessment aces from academic and non-academic programs across campus • 26 academic programs have assessment plans in place and are collecting data. Other programs will be developing assessment plans this semester and implementing them in the spring.

  20. Programs at UHV • Academic Program Reports: 37 total • Arts and Sciences • 12 undergraduate and 6 graduate • Business Administration • 7 undergraduate and 3 graduate • Education and Human Development • 2 undergraduate and 5 graduate • Nursing • 1 undergraduate and 1 graduate

  21. Programs at UHV • Non-Academic Program Reports: 4 Large • Administrative Support • Finance • Institutional Research • Human Resources • Facilities • Campus Security • Educational Support • Academic Affairs • Student Affairs • Libraries • Instructional Technology • Research • Sponsored Programs • Community Engagement • Community Relations • Athletics

  22. Our Second Major Task • Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) • A long-term plan or project in which human and financial resources are committed to support student learning outcomes. • The topic of the QEP is identified by UHV stakeholders—students, faculty, staff • Represents a change in the modus operandi

  23. What’s Been Done So Far: QEP • We’ve held three freshman focus groups to gather data for choosing the topic of our QEP • We are planning focus groups for upper classmen, staff, tenure track faculty, tenured faculty, and administrators • We are developing a survey to gather data from our graduate students • We have identified stakeholder groups that will be included on our QEP Development Team

  24. The Importance of Institutional Support • The development of a QEP that successfully addresses the quality of student learning requires significant commit from the institutional community. Recently reaffirmed institutions note that they wish that they had realized earlier just how many people need to be involved in the development and implementation of their QEPs and the hours required for connecting with people (Handbook for Institutions Seeking Reaffirmation, p. 41).

  25. Internal Audit of Institutional Effectiveness • Each program completes the audit for three cycles of data • Each program exchanges one year’s plan and data with another program (different department) • Each program reviewer walks through the other program’s plan form as if “grading” • Repeat with report of results for the same cycle; then repeat for two more cycles

More Related