1. Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Process Update

2. Overview Campus resources What is accreditation?
Significant changes in the re-accreditation process since 2007
Campus resources
This presentation is geared toward audiences that include people who have gone through this process before as well as those new to the process

3. What is accreditation?
Voluntary process of external review to ensure that institutions provide high-quality education and continuously seek to improve.
Assures the public that UW – Platteville meets clearly communicated criteria and regulations.
Ensures that faculty and students are eligible for federal funding.

4. Who is our accrediting body?
The Higher Learning Commission (HLC), a commission of the North Central Association (NCA)
Federally recognized private, non-profit agency regulated by Congress through the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008

5. What was required previously for re-accreditation?
Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators
On-site Comprehensive Evaluation every 10 years
Self-study prior to Comprehensive Evaluation
200+ page report produced for evaluation team
How it was last time, operating assumption of next experience until recently

6. How has the process changed?
New process called “Open Pathway” replaces PEAQ (Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality)
New timeline for comprehensive evaluations
Separation of Quality Assurance from institutional Quality Initiative for improvement

7. Open Pathway Meeting threshold standards
Verifies that we are:
Meeting threshold standards
Quality Assurance (Criteria for Accreditation)
Engaged in continuous improvement
Quality Initiative
Change from PEAQ model to Open Pathway

8. Two Separate Timelines
This image can be provided as a handout.

9. Quality Assurance Timeline
Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators
Two Comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews in a 10 year cycle
On-site peer review in Year 10 ( )
Off-site panel review in Year 4 of next cycle ( )

10. Quality Assurance Timeline
Our first 4 year review will be ; evidence contribution basically becomes a continuous expectation.
Note: we’re entering the timeline mid-stream

11. Quality Assurance Timeline
Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators
Two comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews
No formalized self-study
Electronic files continuously submitted to HLC Assurance System
Assurance Argument submitted in Years 4 and 10
Quality Assurance system hosted on HLC website – Matt Roberts is the Campus Coordinator for the system

12. Quality Assurance Timeline

13. Quality Assurance Timeline
Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators
Two comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews
No formalized self-study
Revised Criteria for Accreditation
Sub-committees assembled for each criterion
Primary task is to identify and gather evidence to support the Assurance Argument
Quality Assurance system hosted on HLC website – Matt Roberts is the Campus Coordinator for the system

14. Revised Criteria for Accreditation
Mission (formerly Mission & Integrity) Chair: Christina Curras
Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct (Preparing for the Future) Chair: James Mueller
Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support (Student Learning and Effective Teaching) Chair: Shane Drefcinski
Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement (Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge) Co-Chairs: Colleen McCabe and Laura Bayless
Resources, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (Engagement and Service) Chair: Matt Roberts
These have changed significantly from last time, with a greater focus on teaching and learning..
Each criterion has 3-5 subcomponents.
Mission team leader – Christina Curras, Criterion 2 leader TBA, Teaching Quality team leader Shane Drefcinski, Teaching Evaluation co-leaders Colleen McCabe & Laura Bayless, Resources team leader Matt Roberts. Will be developing criterion teams over the next few months (volunteers happily welcomed!)

15. Quality Initiative
Required to undertake a major QI designed to suit our present concerns or aspirations.
Can continue an initiative already in progress or achieve a key milestone in the work of a longer initiative
Must have scope and significance
QI proposal focuses on implementation and assessment of success of the new program review process for APC
Separate from the Quality Assurance aspect of accreditation process.
More information on this coming soon – focus will be on APC Program Review process.

16. Quality Initiative Timeline

17. Summary Different process for accreditation New timelines
Quality Assurance Argument
New Criteria
New process of submitting evidence files
Quality Initiative Project
Implementation and improvement of APC’s Program Review process

18. Campus Resources HLC Steering Committee Website
Regular meetings which anyone is welcome to attend
Website
Information on the process
Timelines
Contact information