Universidad del Sagrado Corazón Workshop for Team Chairs and Evaluators Expectations & Accountability in Accreditation José Jaime Rivera, Ph.D. President Universidad del Sagrado Corazón San Juan, Puerto Rico MSCHE Commissioner October 4, 2011

Workshop Goals This workshop is designed to prepare you to be an effective member of a Middle States evaluation team that recommends appropriate, consistent, rigorous, and defensible accreditation actions to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. These actions are guided by Standards.

Characteristics of Excellence, 2006 What guided the development of these standards? 1. "First, these standards place an emphasis on institutional assessment and assessment of student learning.” [page v.] To emphasize assessment as the tool for improvement. 2. “Second, the standards acknowledge the diversity of educational delivery systems that enable institutions to meet accreditation standards.” [page v.] To recognize and support diversity. 3. “. . . the standards are clearly defined and illustrated, . . .” [page v.] To provide transparency to the process.

Characteristics of Excellence Emphasis on assessment ". . . the Commission is aware of the institutional effort and cultural change that the relative emphasis on assessment may require.” [page v.] We must understand the key role that the self-study process and the team visit can have to accelerate/recognize that cultural change. The consequences of a continued postponement of comprehensive, quantitative and qualitative metrics in the assessment of higher education legitimizes and justifies outside intervention in the determination of these metrics.

MSCHE Context ". . . a professional association devoted to educational improvement through accreditation.” “Accreditation is the means of self-regulation and peer review . . . intended to strengthen and sustain quality and integrity in higher education, making it worthy of public confidence and minimizing the scope of external control.” [emphasis added] “MSA’s accreditation is an expression of confidence in an institution’s mission and goals, its performance, and its resources.” [iv.]

National Context Increasing attention paid to higher education and accreditation; rising questions about their value Concerns about rising costs and spending for Federal student aid, together with “low” graduation rates Misunderstanding about the role of the “peer” in the peer review process Occasional calls for “one-size-fits-all” metrics that do not respect unique missions [NCLB…]

What does CHE expect of Teams & Chairs? Respect for the Mission/uniqueness of host institution Recognition of achievements Collegial analysis and Integrity of peer review process Expertise and Preparation Team reports based firmly on Middle States Standards and supported by evidence Avoid prescriptive pronouncements Compassionate Rigor

What can you expect from the Commission? Team reports are read carefully and help MSCHE at the next levels of review Committee on Evaluation Reports Commission Meetings Committee and Commission members [with your support] work to ensure consistent application of Standards across institutions MSCHE will inform the institution of the final Commission action on reaccreditation