Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Process Update

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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 (2016-17) Off-site panel review in Year 4 of next cycle (2020-21)

Quality Assurance Timeline Our first 4 year review will be 2020-21; evidence contribution basically becomes a continuous expectation. Note: we’re entering the timeline mid-stream

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

Quality Assurance Timeline

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

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!)

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.

Quality Initiative Timeline

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

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