Standard Two Les Steele Executive Vice President.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The PRR: Linking Assessment, Planning & Budgeting PRR Workshop – April 4, 2013 Barbara Samuel Loftus, Ph.D. Misericordia University.
Advertisements

STRATEGIC PLAN Community Unit School District 300 7/29/
Campus Improvement Plans
NWCCU Standards for Accredition The new process. Revised NWCCU Accreditation Standards New Standards: reduced from 9 to 5 Standard One--Mission, Core.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
ONE-STOP SHOP: INTEGRATED ONLINE PROGRAM REVIEW AND BUDGET PLANNING Daylene Meuschke, Ed.D. Director, Institutional Research Barry Gribbons, Ph.D. Assistant.
Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD Director, Office for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Program Review Orientation 1.
TaskStream Training Presented by the Committee on Learning Assessment 2015.
Moving on to our Second Report! Due to NWCCU by Fall 2012.
2009 NWCCU Annual Meeting Overview of the Revised Accreditation Standards and New Oversight Process Ronald L. Baker Executive Vice President and Director,
Assessment & Evaluation Committee A New Road Ahead Presentation Dr. Keith M. McCoy, Vice President Professor Jennifer Jakob, English Associate Director.
August 3,  Review “Guiding Principles for SLO Assessment” (ASCCC, 2010)  Review Assessment Pulse Roundtable results  Discuss and formulate our.
Association for Biblical Higher Education February 13, 2013 Lori Jo Stanfield Evaluator Team Training for Business Officers.
Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.
Vaal University of Technology (formerly Vaal Triangle Technikon ) Ms A.J. GOZO Senior Director: Library and Information Services.
Mission and Mission Fulfillment Tom Miller University of Alaska Anchorage.
2009 NWCCU Annual Meeting Overview of the Revised Accreditation Standards and New Oversight Process Ronald L. Baker Executive Vice President and Director,
Developing the Year One Report: WVC’s Experience as a Pilot College Dr. Susan Murray Executive Director, Institutional Effectiveness.
Using the ACCJC Rubrics Dan Peck Cynthia Klawender-Lee.
What could we learn from learning outcomes assessment programs in the U.S public research universities? Samuel S. Peng Center for Educational Research.
Florida Tech’s University Assessment Committee For A Continuing Culture of Assessment.
Quality Assurance and Quality Improvement.  Standard Pathway - Required for all institutions granted initial accreditation, institutions in significant.
Moving on to our Second Report! Due to NWCCU by Fall 2012.
Student Support Services Standard II B & C. II.B. The institution recruits and admits diverse students who are able to benefit from its programs, consistent.
“A Truthful Evaluation Of Yourself Gives Feedback For Growth and Success” Brenda Johnson Padgett Brenda Johnson Padgett.
Accomplishing the Mission Mission and institutional effectiveness expectations in the revised Accreditation Standards Prepared for MPC Academic Senate.
A Basic Guide to Academic Assessment Presented by Darby Kaikkonen Director of Institutional Research.
Institutional Effectiveness A set of ongoing and systematic actions, processes, steps and practices that include: Planning Assessment of programs and.
The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment
MVC – Outcomes Assessment FLEX –Day February 8, 2013.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Revisions to the nwccu accreditation standards: what does it mean for me? Diane E. Waryas.
2008 Spring Semester Workshop AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP T. Gilmour Reeve, Ph.D. Director of Strategic Planning.
Accreditation Update and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes Deborah Moeckel, SUNY Assistant Provost SCoA Drive in Workshops Fall 2015
Strategic Planning for the Department of Health and Human Performance Iowa State University T. Gilmour Reeve Director of Strategic Planning Office of the.
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
CAMPUS AND COMMUNITY OPEN SESSION MARCH 25 Higher Learning Commission Re-accreditation.
Accreditation Overview Winter 2016 Mallory Newell, Accreditation Liaison Office.
The School Effectiveness Framework
Council March PREVIOUS Reductionistic Whole = Sum of the Parts A Snapshot of the institution at a specific moment in time NEW Synergistic Whole.
KSU’s Quality Enhancement Plan.  Current Core Requirement 2.12  The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) that (1)
Annual Planning Task Force (APTF) Recommendations NOVEMBER 18, 2014.
February, MansourahProf. Nadia Badrawi Implementation of National Academic Reference Standards Prof. Nadia Badrawi Senior Member and former chairperson.
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat Le Secrétariat de la littératie et de la numératie October – octobre 2007 The School Effectiveness Framework A Collegial.
HLC Criterion Five Primer Thursday, Nov. 5, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Effective Practices in Accreditation: Standard I Mission, Academic Quality and Institutional Effectiveness, and Integrity Stephanie Curry—Reedley College.
HLC Criterion Three Primer: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support Thursday, September 24, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Model of an Effective Program Review October 2008 Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
 Julie Bruno, Sierra College  Roberta Eisel, Citrus College  Fred Hochstaedter, Monterey Peninsula College.
HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Integrated Planning Randy Lawson 411 Training April, 2016.
Övergripande org. illustration
Data You Can Use for Accreditation
Paralegal studies and college accreditation
Assessment & Evaluation Committee
Achieving the Dream Mark A. Smith.
Institutional Effectiveness Plan
Curriculum & Accreditation: You Can Get There from Here
Curriculum and Accreditation
Curriculum and Accreditation
Assessment Presentation
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
NWCCU update February 13, 2018.
PORTERVILLE COLLEGE ACCREDITATION OVERVIEW Fall 2017
ACCJC Standards Adopted june 2014.
Assessment & Evaluation Committee
February 21-22, 2018.
Outcomes Training.
Fort Valley State University
Presentation transcript:

Standard Two Les Steele Executive Vice President

Standard Two: Resources and Capacity Standard 2.AGovernance Standard 2.BHuman Resources Standard 2.CEducation Resources Standard 2.DStudent Support Resources Standard 2.ELibrary and Information Resources Standard 2.FFinancial Resources Standard 2.GPhysical and Technological Infrastructure

Does the institution have the resources and capacity to fulfill its mission? Does it have the infrastructure to fulfill its mission? Focus on 2.C.1, 2.C.2, 2.C.5, and 2.C.9-11

Compliance Issues – Credit Hour Policy – Record of Student Complaints Simplify and Be Concise

Providing Evidence – Institution determines what evidence is needed to verify compliance – NWCCU offers List of Evidence, but it is not exhaustive – Workroom must include one hard copy of all policies

Table Discussion Questions How are you organizing to prepare your Standard Two response? How will you collect, organize, and manage your evidence? What secrets have you discovered to keep your response clear and concise? Do you clearly present your student learning outcomes?

Standard Three

3.A Institutional Planning 3.A.1 The institution engages in ongoing, purposeful, systematic, integrated, and comprehensive planning that leads to fulfillment of its mission. Its plans are implemented and made available to appropriate constituencies. 3.A.2 The institution’s comprehensive planning process is broad-based and offers opportunities for input by appropriate constituencies.

3.A Institutional Planning 3.A.3 The institution’s comprehensive planning process is informed by the collection of appropriately defined data that are analyzed and used to evaluate fulfillment of its mission. 3.A.4 The institution’s comprehensive plan articulates priorities and guides decisions on resource allocation and application of institutional capacity. 3.A.5 The institution’s planning includes emergency preparedness and contingency planning for continuity and recovery of operations should catastrophic events significantly interrupt normal institutional operations.

Standard Three Concise overview of institution’s planning process Concise responses to each section of Standard Three Provide evidence of planning

Table Discussion Questions How will you organize your response to Standard 3.A? Who will be responsible for Standard 3.A? What evidence will you include for Standard 3.A?

Standard 3.B B.1 Planning for each core theme is consistent with the institution’s comprehensive plan and guides the selection of programs and services to ensure they are aligned with and contribute to accomplishment of the core theme’s objectives. 3.B.2 Planning for core theme programs and services guides the selection of contributing components of those programs and services to ensure they are aligned with and contribute to achievement of the goals or intended outcomes of the respective programs and services. 3.B.3 Core theme planning is informed by the collection of appropriately defined data that are analyzed and used to evaluate accomplishment of core theme objectives. Planning for programs and services is informed by the collection of appropriately defined data that are used to evaluate achievement of the goals or intended outcomes of those programs and services.

Standard Four The institution regularly and systematically collects data related to clearly defined indicators of achievement, analyzes those data, and formulates evidence-based evaluations of the achievement of core theme objectives. It demonstrates clearly defined procedures for evaluating the integration and significance of institutional planning, the allocation of resources, and the application of capacity in its activities for achieving the intended outcomes of its programs and services and for achieving its core theme objectives. The institution disseminates assessment results to its constituencies and uses those results to effect improvement.

Standard Four - Assessment 4.A.1 The institution engages in ongoing systematic collection and analysis of meaningful, assessable, and verifiable data—quantitative and/or qualitative, as appropriate to its indicators of achievement—as the basis for evaluating the accomplishment of its core theme objectives. 4.A.2 The institution engages in an effective system of evaluation of its programs and services, wherever offered and however delivered, to evaluate achievement of clearly identified program goals or intended outcomes. Faculty have a primary role in the evaluation of educational programs and services.

Standard Four - Assessment 4.A.3 The institution documents, through an effective, regular, and comprehensive system of assessment of student achievement, that students who complete its educational courses, programs, and degrees, wherever offered and however delivered, achieve identified course, program, and degree learning outcomes. Faculty with teaching responsibilities are responsible for evaluating student achievement of clearly identified learning outcomes. 4.A.4 The institution evaluates holistically the alignment, correlation, and integration of programs and services with respect to accomplishment of core theme objectives.

Standard Four - Assessment 4.A.5 The institution evaluates holistically the alignment, correlation, and integration of planning, resources, capacity, practices, and assessment with respect to achievement of the goals or intended outcomes of its programs or services, wherever offered and however delivered. 4.A.6 The institution regularly reviews its assessment processes to ensure they appraise authentic achievements and yield meaningful results that lead to improvement.

Standard Four - Improvement 4.B.1 Results of core theme assessments and results of assessments of programs and services are: a) based on meaningful institutionally identified indicators of achievement; b) used for improvement by informing planning, decision making, and allocation of resources and capacity; and c) made available to appropriate constituencies in a timely manner. 4.B.2 The institution uses the results of its assessment of student learning to inform academic and learning- support planning and practices that lead to enhancement of student learning achievements. Results of student learning assessments are made available to appropriate constituencies in a timely manner.

Core Theme 1 – 3.B – Planning – 4.A – Assessment – 4.B – Improvement Core Theme 2 (etc.)

Include Objectives Include Indicators Include Data Include evidence of analysis Include evidence of improvement

Table Discussion Questions How will you select and organize evidence for each Core Theme Response? How will you document analysis process? What academic programs will you use to document progress regarding student learning outcomes?