The ACCJC Rubric and Beyond Julie Bruno, Sierra College Susan Clifford, ACCJC Fred Hochstaedter Monterey Peninsula College

To Write a Self-Evaluation You Need: An objective perspective The ability to visualize college processes as a whole A willingness to admit college successes and challenges

Every Project Needs a Plan What do the Standards mean? -Guide to Evaluating Institutions -Guide to Evaluating DE/CE -Annotated Guide to Standards -The Rubric New USDE Regulations Bringing it all back together – Institutional Effectiveness

Provides a set of questions to be used when evaluating Standards.

Questions to guide institutions in their evaluation of the Standards

Another example of questions

Provides a focused view on the institution’s quality in the area of DE/CE

Standard 1B

The Annotated Standards

R UBRIC FOR E VALUATING I NSTITUTIONAL E FFECTIVENESS – P ART I: P ROGRAM R EVIEW Levels of Implementation Awareness Development Proficiency  Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement

P ROGRAM R EVIEW PROCESSES ARE ONGOING, SYSTEMATIC AND USED TO ASSESS AND IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING AND ACHIEVEMENT.  The institution evaluates all courses and programs through an on-going systematic review of their relevance, appropriateness, achievement of learning outcomes, currency, and future needs and plans. ACCJC Standard I.A.2.e

T HE INSTITUTION REVIEWS AND REFINES ITS PROGRAM REVIEW PROCESSES TO IMPROVE INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS.  The institution assesses its evaluation mechanisms through a systematic review of their effectiveness in improving instructional programs, student support services and library and other learning support services. ACCJC Standard I.B.7

T HE RESULTS OF PROGRAM REVIEW ARE USED TO CONTINUALLY REFINE AND IMPROVE PROGRAM PRACTICES RESULTING IN APPROPRIATE IMPROVEMENTS IN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND LEARNING.  The institution demonstrates its effectiveness by providing 1) evidence of achievement of student learning outcomes and 2) evidence of institution and program performance. ACCJC Standard I.B.  The institution uses established procedures to design, identify learning outcomes for, approve, administer, deliver and evaluate courses and programs. The institution recognizes the central role of its faculty for establishing quality and improving instructional courses and programs. ACCJC Standard II.A.2.a

Rubric for Evaluating Institutional Effectiveness – Part II: Planning The Commission Expects Colleges to be at the Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement Level

ACCJC Rubric Part II: Planning The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and improve student learning.  The institution assures the effectiveness of its ongoing planning and resource allocation processes by systematically reviewing and modifying, as appropriate, all parts of the cycle, including institutional and other research efforts. ACCJC Standard I.B.6

Rubric for Evaluating Institutional Effectiveness – Part iii: Student Learning Outcomes Levels of Implementation Awareness Development  Proficiency Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement

PROFICIENCY Student learning outcomes and authentic assessment are in place for courses, programs and degrees.  The institution identifies student learning outcomes for courses, programs, certificates, and degrees; assesses student achievement of those outcomes; and uses assessment results to make improvements. ACCJC Standard II.A.1.c.

C OURSE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ARE ALIGNED WITH DEGREE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES  The institution evaluates all courses and programs through an on-going systematic review of their relevance, appropriateness, achievement of learning outcomes, currency, and future needs and plans. ACCJC Standard II.A.2.e.

Comprehensive assessment reports exist and are completed and updated on a regular basis  The institution establishes student learning programs and services aligned with its purposes, its character, and its student population. ACCJC Standard I.A.1.  The institution relies on faculty expertise and the assistance of advisory committees when appropriate to identify competency levels and measurable student learning outcomes for courses, certificates, programs including general and vocational education and degrees. The institution regularly assesses student progress towards achieving those goals. ACCJC Standard II.A.2.b.

S TUDENTS DEMONSTRATE AWARENESS OF GOALS AND PURPOSES OF COURSES AND PROGRAMS IN WHICH THEY ARE ENROLLED  The institution assures that students and prospective students receive clear and accurate information about educational courses and programs and transfer policies. The institution describes its degrees and certificates in terms of their purpose, content, course requirements, and expected student learning outcomes. In every class section students receive a course syllabus that specifies learning outcomes consistent with those in the institution’s officially approved course outline. ACCJC Standard II.A.6.

T HERE IS A WIDESPREAD INSTITUTIONAL DIALOGUE ABOUT ASSESSMENT RESULTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF GAPS  The institution maintains an ongoing, collegial, self-reflective dialogue about the continuous improvement of student learning and institutional processes. ACCJC Standard I. B. 1.  The institution uses documented assessment results to communicate matters of quality assurance to appropriate constituencies. ACCJC Standard I. B. 5.

D ECISION MAKING INCLUDES DIALOGUE ON THE RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT AND IS PURPOSEFULLY DIRECTED TOWARD ALIGNING INSTITUTION - WIDE PRACTICES TO SUPPORT AND IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING  The institution relies on faculty, its academic senate or other appropriate faculty structures, the curriculum committee, and academic administrators for recommendations about student learning and programs and services. ACCJC Standard IV.A.2.b.

A PPROPRIATE RESOURCES CONTINUE TO BE ALLOCATED AND FINE - TUNED  The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support student learning, measures that learning, assesses how well learning is occurring, and makes changes to improve student learning… ACCJC Standard I.B.  The institution provides evidence that the planning process is broad-based, offers opportunities for input by appropriate constituencies, allocates necessary resources, and leads to improvement of institutional effectiveness. ACCJC Standard I.B.4.  The institution systematically assesses the effective use of financial resources and uses the results of the evaluation as the basis for improvement. ACCJC Standard III.D.3.

USDE Regulations Institution-set standards for satisfactory performance in achieving student success (learning and achievement); teams to determine if these standards are reasonable Academic Credit / Clock to Credit Hour Conversion Student Complaints Appropriate use of DE/CE terminology Monitoring fiscal condition/stability Two-Year Rule

During the Visit, the Team Should: Assess the degree to which the institution meets or exceeds the Standards Cross validate whenever conflicting information is received Share concerns with other team members Visit off-campus sites where 50% or more of a program is offered, including international sites Review the institution’s files of student complaints and grievances Continued (Team Evaluator Manual)

During the Visit, the Team Should: Identify the institution-set standards of student learning and achievement Evaluate the appropriateness of these standards Consider these standards in relation to the college mission Review and describe the data and analyze the college’s performance Describe the institution’s overall performance (those standards met and not met) Determine whether the college is meeting its standards (Team Evaluator Manual)

One Equation for Accreditation Success Program Review + Planning + SLO Assessment = Institutional Effectiveness

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words Activity: Draw your college’s planning processes Include: SLO Assessment Program Review Planning and Budgeting How do they fit together?

Bravery Award Anyone willing to share a drawing?

Monterey Peninsula College Planning and Resource Allocation Process (simplified version) 1. Planning  3-year Institutional  Educational Master Plan 2. Program Review  6-year Cycle  Annual Report with Action Plans 3. Institutional Review  Administration  Faculty-led advisory groups 4. Resource Allocation  Infrastructure  Equipment  Personnel 5. Evaluation  Institutional  Area

Monterey Peninsula College Planning and Resource Allocation Process 1. Planning  3-year Institutional  Educational Master Plan 2. Program Review  6-year Cycle  Annual Report with Action Plans 3. Institutional Review  Administration  Faculty-led advisory groups 4. Resource Allocation  Infrastructure  Equipment  Personnel 5. Evaluation  Institutional  Area SLOs live here  Data driven  Dialog

2. Program Review  6-year Cycle  Annual Report with Action Plans Instructor Reflections on Student Learning Program Reflections on Student Learning These Forms/Processes are the Heart of MPC’s SLO Efforts. They are designed to prompt  Dialog  Collaboration  Improvement Efforts  Action Plan Rationale Code word for SLO

Bottom Line Your college will be judged on the Standards, not the rubrics

Overall: Where is your College? Rate yourself on all three rubrics

Questions?

Resources ACCJC site where all resources in this presentation are linked: policies Resources Used: Rubric for Evaluating Institutional Effectiveness Guide to Evaluating Institutions Guide to Evaluating Distance Education and Correspondence Education Accreditation Standards Annotated for CQI and SLOs