Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ACCREDITATION Community Day February 1, Significance of Accreditation Accreditation – Accreditation – Allows the students at KC to apply for Federal.
Advertisements

Fall 2013 PDD Accreditation Overview Just Completed a Report and were Reaffirmed… Why Another Report ?!
Orientation for New Site Visitors CIDA’s Mission, Value, and the Guiding Principles of Peer Review.
September 8, /8/2014 Margarita Pillado -- Faculty Accreditation Coordinator -- Los Angeles Pierce College 1.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
1 Preparing for Institutional Self Study Dr. Deborah G. Blue, Vice President Mr. Jack Pond, Vice President Fall 2005.
Faculty WASC Information Session January 18, 2011.
A Presentation for Peralta Community College District Governing Board By Thomas E. Henry, PCCD Fiscal Adviser November 10,
Accreditation Update COLLEGE of Alameda Spring 2015.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
2009 NWCCU Annual Meeting Overview of the Revised Accreditation Standards and New Oversight Process Ronald L. Baker Executive Vice President and Director,
1 Cosumnes River College’s Institutional Self Study Norv Wellsfry Fall 2007.
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
ACCJC SPECIAL REPORT DUE TO FINANCIAL REVIEW CONTACT: DR. VICTOR JAIME, ED.D DUE: APRIL 15, 2014.
Middle States Accreditation at UB Jason N. Adsit Director, Teaching and Learning Center Michael E. Ryan Director, University Accreditation and Assessment.
Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.
ANDREW LAMANQUE, PHD SPRING 2014 Status Report: Foothill Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT Academic Senate Carol Kimbrough, MA, MFT November 25, 2014.
Accreditation and Self Study Process A presentation by: Joseph Saimon Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) (Director for Development and Community Relations)
Accreditation Update COLLEGE of Alameda Fall 2014.
IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING for Institutional Effectiveness THE REASON: Improvement of Student Learning and Institutional Support Services THE OCCASION: Regional.
Working with Trustees to Address Standard IV Recommendations What are the roles we play?
By Elizabeth Meade Our Reaccreditation through Middle States Commission on Higher Education Presentation to the Board of Trustees, May 11, 2012.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report District Accreditation Bibb County Schools February 5-8, 2012.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation 7/28/09 Academic Affairs Retreat Cathy Sanders Director of Assessment.
Los Angeles Southwest College LACCD Trustee Accreditation Subcommittee Self-Study Overview December 14, 2005.
Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.
Accreditation Visit: OMG! What if they ask me a question?? Accreditation Tri-Chairs: Kelly Irwin Ginni May Don Palm Fall 2015.
Los Angeles Mission College Institutional Self Study for Reaffirmation of Accreditation
SACS Leadership Retreat 9/23/ Western Carolina University SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation Frank Prochaska Executive Director, UNC Teaching.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
WASC “All Hands” Meeting Overview and Update November 12, 2007 D. Jonte-Pace.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
A STUDENT’S GUIDE ACCREDITATION WHAT IS ACCREDITATION? The process by which a college is certified by a regional accrediting agency, such as the.
SACS/CASI District Accreditation  January 2007  April 2007  May 2007  January – April 2008  Board Approval for Pursuit of District Accreditation.
External Review Team: Roles and Responsibilities A Very Brief Training! conducted by JoLynn Noe Office of Assessment.
Accreditation Update and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes Deborah Moeckel, SUNY Assistant Provost SCoA Drive in Workshops Fall 2015
The Periodic Review Report and Middle States Accreditation PRR Workshop April 9, 2008.
Program Review 2.0 Pilot 2 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
Accreditation Overview Winter 2016 Mallory Newell, Accreditation Liaison Office.
August 2, Welcome Who is the TSD Continuous Improvement Team ? What is the work of the TSD Continuous Improvement Team? What is.
Accreditation 101 Julie Bruno, Sierra College Glenn Yoshida, Los Angeles Southwest College Roberta Eisel, Citrus College, facilitator Susan Clifford, ACCJC,
Program Review 2.0 Pilot 2 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.
What is Regional Accreditation? Regional Accreditation is a time-tested model of professional peer review that supports education excellence. Accreditation.
Accreditation Self-Study Progress Update Presentation to the SCCCD Board of Trustees Madera Center October 5, 2010 Tony Cantu, Fresno City College Marilyn.
MT. SAN JACINTO COLLEGE Accreditation Self Study Report 2011 presented by Rebecca Teague, Accreditation Liaison Officer Steering & Standard Chair Committee.
Accreditation Update Self-Study Progress and Review MPC Flex Days Spring 2015.
October 20 – November 6, 2014 Alovidin Bakhovidinov Alina Batkayeva
Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.
Overview of SACS-COC Reaffirmation Process Prepared for Reaffirmation Steering Committee April 10, 2006.
 Julie Bruno, Sierra College  Roberta Eisel, Citrus College  Fred Hochstaedter, Monterey Peninsula College.
1 Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the Basics.
MSJC Accreditation Classified Professional Day – March 22,2017
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
Why is My College on warning? Understanding the Accreditation Process.
Accreditation 2016 Session 1.
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
President Yong Vice President Aytch Lynette Apen, IEC Co-Chair
PORTERVILLE COLLEGE ACCREDITATION OVERVIEW Fall 2017
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
Evergreen Valley College Accreditation Update October 20, 2014
CUNY Graduate School and University Center
Accreditation: Working towards the self-study
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Get on Board: Reaffirmation 2016
Presentation transcript:

Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College

Topics to be Covered   Accreditation Overview   Lassen Community College History   Format of the Internal Evaluation (Self- Study)   Components of the Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)   Four Standards of Good Practice   Timeline   Resources

Accreditation Overview

What is Regional Accreditation?   Regional Accreditation is a time-tested model of professional peer review that supports education excellence.   Accreditation is a voluntary process of quality review that institutions agree to undergo periodically.   The accrediting commission with responsibility for accreditation in various regions are legally recognized by the federal government.

How is Accreditation Review Conducted?   There are four phases of the accreditation process: » »internal evaluation » »external evaluation by professional peers » »Commission evaluation » »institutional self-improvement   The accreditation process involves a six year cycle.

Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)   The institution engages in comparing itself to Accreditation Standards, writes an internal evaluation report, develops its own plans for improvement where needed, and submits the written analysis to the Accrediting Commission.

Peer Review   At the second phase, a trained team of education professional peers from member institutions conducts an external institutional evaluation. The external evaluation team, all volunteers, visits the institution, examines the institutional internal evaluation, examines institutional practices, and writes an evaluative report with recommendations for improvement.

Regional Accrediting Commission Action   The third phase occurs when the members of the regional accrediting commission evaluate all the information and make the decision on the accredited status of the institution.   The Commission may also provide recommendations and direction for institutional improvement in areas where improvement is needed.   The ACCJC reviews institutional cases at meetings in January and June of each year.

Self- Improvement   Whether the institution meets the current Accreditation Standards or not, the fourth phase is about self-improvement and each institution uses the recommendations of the external evaluation team and the Commission to guide changes that make their educational quality better.

Lassen Community College Accreditation History

  June 1996 – College placed on Probation (four recommendations)   June 1997 – College elevated to Warning   June College removed from Sanctions   June 2002 – Accreditation Re-affirmed following Self- Evaluation (three recommendations with Progress Report)   June Progress Report Accepted   June 2005 – Focused Midterm Report Accepted with Progress Report documenting progress on two of the original three recommendations identified in   June 2006 – Commission identified major issues and scheduled a Special Visit   July Special Visit

  August 2006 – College placed on Warning (twenty-one specific recommendations with a November Progress Report)   January 2007 – College placed on Probation (seventeen remaining recommendation with a March Progress Report and Site Visit)   June 2007 – College continued on Probation (ten remaining recommendation with a October Progress Report and Site Visit)   January College continued on Probation(seven remaining recommendation with a October Progress Report and Site Visit)   March 2008 – Site Visit by Evaluation Team for 2008 Self- Study

  June College continued on Probation (eight remaining recommendations with a Follow-up Report and Site Visit)   January 2009-College place on Warning (three remaining recommendations with a March Follow-up Report and Site Visit)   June 2009 – College continued on Warning (two remaining recommendations with a October Follow-up Report and Site Visit)   January 2010 – College removed from Sanctions (reminder of Midterm Report due March 2011)   June Midterm Report Accepted (Self Evaluation due Fall 2013 with Site Visit March 2014)   October 2011 – Self-Evaluation Training Workshop   March 2012 – Orientation Training for Self -Evaluation

Internal Self Evaluation

Format of the Internal Evaluation   Introduction   Organization of Self Evaluation Process   Organizational Information   Certification of Continued Institutional Compliance with 20 Eligibility Requirements.   Responses to Recommendations from the Most Recent Educational Quality and Institutional Effectiveness Review (Self Evaluation) – eight recommendations   Structure of the Institutional Analysis (Standards)

Analysis of Each Standard   The following three elements should guide the structure of the analysis of each of the Standards:   Descriptive Summary   Self Evaluation   Actionable Improvement Plans

Descriptive Summary   What is?   A concise factual description of the current status of the college relevant to the subcomponent of the standard.

Self Evaluation   How is it working?   An analysis supported by documentation of the current status of the college relevant to the subcomponent of the standard.   An analysis of how the description meets the standard.   Nearly every statement should have documentation   Not opinion

Actionable Improvement Plans   Specific actions that the institution plans to take to improve status related to the subcomponent of the standard.   Not keep doing what we are doing   “None” is appropriate if the analysis supports that the subcomponent is being met   The institution must track and report on every actionable improvement plan for the next six years.

Commission Requirements for Evidence   Student Achievement Data   Evidence of Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment of Outcomes   Evidence of Quality Program Review   Evidence of Quality Student Support Services   Evidence of Financial Performance and Integrity   Evidence of Compliance with other Areas Related to Federal Requirements. » »Distance Education and Correspondence Education » »Public Information » »Campus Sites

Accreditation Standards The ACCJC Accreditation Standards consists of four fundamental standards, each divided into subsections, that describe the best practices for education quality and institutional effectiveness.

Standard I Institutional Mission and Effectiveness   Mission   Improving Institutional Effectiveness

Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness   A. Mission The institution has a statement of mission that defines the institution’s broad educational purposes, its intended student population, and its commitment to achieving student learning. 1. The institution establishes student learning programs and services aligned with its purposes, its character, and its student population. 2. The mission statement is approved by the governing board and published. 3. Using the institution's governance and decision- making processes, the institution reviews its mission statement on a regular basis and revises it as necessary. 4. The institution’s mission is central to institutional planning and decision making.

Standard II Student Learning Programs and Services   Instructional Programs   Student Support Services   Library and Learning Support Services

Standard III Resources   Human Resource   Physical Resource   Technology Resources   Financial Resources

Standard IV Leadership and Governance   Decision-making Roles and Processes   Board   Administrative Organization

Themes In addition to the standards, the institution must also address six themes separately or throughout the self evaluation.

Institutional Commitment   The standards ask institution’s to make a commitment in action to providing high quality education congruent with institutional mission.   The standards’ requirement that the entire institution participate in reviewing institutional performance and developing plans for improvement of student learning outcome is intended to help the institution sustain it’s commitment to student learning.

Evaluation, Planning and Improvement   The standards require ongoing institutional evaluation and improvement to help serve students better.   Evaluation focuses on student achievement, student learning, and the effectiveness of processes, policies, and organization.   Improvement is achieved through an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, implementation and re-evaluation.

Student Learning Outcomes   The development of student learning outcomes is one of the keys themes in the standards.   Learning outcomes must be measured and assessed to determine how well learning is occurring so that changes to improve learning and teaching can be made.   The faculty must engage in discussions of way to deliver instruction to maximize student learning.   Those providing student support must develop student learning outcomes and evaluate the quality of their policies, processes, and procedures for providing students access and movement through the institution.   Student learning outcomes are required to be at the center of the institution’s key processes and allocation of resources.

Organization   The standards require colleges to have inclusive, informed and intentional efforts to define student learning, provide programs to support that learning, and to evaluate how well learning is occurring.   This requirement means that the institution must have in place the organizational means to identify and make public the learning outcomes, to evaluate the effectiveness of programs in producing those outcomes, and to make improvements.

Dialogue   The standards are designed to facilitate college engagement in inclusive, informed and intentional dialogue about institutional quality and improvement.   All members of the college community should participate in reflection and exchange about student achievement, student learning, and the effectiveness of the college’s processes, policies, and organization.

Institutional Integrity   Institution’s demonstrated concern with honesty, truthfulness, and the manner in which it represents itself to all stakeholders, internal and external.

Timeline

Spring 2012   March 1, 2012 – Orientation Meetings for each Standard   Initial Standard Meetings   Identification of Standard Chairs   Assignment of Areas of Responsibility   Gather Evidence   Identify Tasks for Completion/Improvement   May 2012 – Selection of Internal Evaluation Accreditation Chair

Fall 2012   Standard Meetings to Monitor Progress   Write initial drafts for each subsection of each Standard   Gather Evidence to support statements (Electronic)   Completion of tasks (program review, student learning outcome assessments, planning)

Spring 2013   Refine Draft Sections of Internal Evaluation   Compile Additional Evidence   May 2013 – Completion of Draft Internal Evaluation

Fall 2013   August through October – Constituent Group Review of Internal Evaluation   November – Governing Board Approval of Internal Evaluation   December - Submit Internal Evaluation to ACCJC

Spring 2014   February – Final Preparation for Team Visit   March Peer Evaluation Team Visit   June 2014 – Accrediting Commission Action on Internal Evaluation and Evaluation Team Report   July 2014 – Receipt of Action Letter

Resources   ACCJC Website –   Accreditation Reference Handbook   Manual for Institutional Self Evaluation   Guide to Evaluating Institutions   Guide to Evaluating Distance Education and Correspondence Education   College Website