CONNECTING the DOTS Student Learning Outcomes Commission on Colleges Achieving Excellence Committee.

Slides:



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

ACCREDITATION Community Day February 1, Significance of Accreditation Accreditation – Accreditation – Allows the students at KC to apply for Federal.
Introduction to Assessment – Support Services Andrea Brown Director of Program Assessment and Institutional Research Dr. Debra Bryant Accreditation Liaison.
Support Services Review Support Services Review (SSR) is a representative, responsive form of assessment and self-evaluation to ensure continuous quality.
 2009– LA Delta Initially Accredited by SACS  July 2010 – Tallulah & Lake Providence Consolidated with LA Delta  July 2012 – LA Delta & NELTC Legislatively.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
Longwood University QEP QEP stands for Quality Enhancement Plan.
History, Status and Challenges as of August 2010 Outcomes, Assessment and Accreditation.
8/4/2015 Support Services Review (SSR) is a representative, responsive form of assessment and self-evaluation to ensure continuous quality improvement.
HELPFUL TIPS FOR UNIT PLANNING Office of Institutional Effectiveness.
Columbia-Greene Community College The following presentation is a chronology of the College strategic planning process, plan and committee progress The.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
SAISD Federal Programs Department. Stage 1 of the Organization and Development Process Form the Planning Team 1 2.
Reaffirmation of Accreditation: Institutional Effectiveness Southern Association of Colleges and Schools February 2008 Stephen F. Austin State University.
University Of North Alabama General Education Assessment Paradigm Shift: A plan for Revising General Education Assessment at UNA.
Departmental Assessment Process.  The institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides.
Fifth Year Interim Reports Texas Association for Institutional Research Ralph Russell Director of Institutional Support Commission on Colleges.
Federal Emphasis on Accountability in Higher Education and Regional Accreditation Processes Carla D. Sanderson Commissioner, Southern Association of Colleges.
Reaffirmation of WCU General Orientation Wednesday, June 22, 2005 Carol Burton, Director, SACS Review.
Where Innovation Is Tradition Students as Scholars : QEP Update Fall 2010 Kimberly K. Eby Bethany M. Usher QEP Planning Committee.
Keeping Up-to-Date with SACSCOC MAC Meeting Fall 2013.
IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING for Institutional Effectiveness THE REASON: Improvement of Student Learning and Institutional Support Services THE OCCASION: Regional.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Academic Assessment Accountability: Are we what we say we are? Program Improvement: How can we be even better? External audiences: SACS.
Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) 101 Del Mar College January 8, 2007 Loraine Phillips, Ph.D. Interim Assessment Director Texas A&M University.
What’s New in SACS Reaffirmation Ephraim Schechter September 23, 2004 Western Carolina University.
Full-Time Faculty In-Service: Program and Student Learning Outcomes Fall 2005.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
December 2010 Board of Trustees Overview of the New Accreditation, Accountability, and Assessment Committee Structure.
April 8, Agenda Charge of the Group SACS/QEP Update/Overview 5 th Year Interim Report Assigned Areas Next Steps.
Fifth Year Report and Substantive Change Processes Presented by Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, President SACS Commission on Colleges April 29, 2009.
Florida Tech’s University Assessment Committee For A Continuing Culture of Assessment.
SACS and The Accreditation Process Faculty Convocation Southern University Monday, January 12, 2009 Presented By Emma Bradford Perry Dean of Libraries.
Jackson County Public Schools Technology Plan Kimberly Body and Elizabeth Perin Liberty University Education 639.
By Monica Y. Peters, Ph.D. Coordinator of Institutional Effectiveness/QEP Office of Quality Enhancement.
Institutional Effectiveness A set of ongoing and systematic actions, processes, steps and practices that include: Planning Assessment of programs and.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Assessment Accountability: Are we doing what we say we are doing? Program Improvement: How can we be even better? External audiences: SACS.
SACS Leadership Retreat 9/23/ Western Carolina University SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation Frank Prochaska Executive Director, UNC Teaching.
SACSOC ACCREDITATION AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS STUDENT AFFAIRS LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES REVIEW COMMITTEE OCTOBER 17, Allan Aycock.
Long-Range Planning Presentation to the Del Mar College Board Committee May 13, 2008.
SUBMITTED TO THE HIGHER LEARNING COMMISSION OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS MAY 2010 Progress Report on Outcomes Assessment.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
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.”
STRATEGIC PLANNING & WASC UPDATE Tom Bennett Presentation to Academic Senate February 1, 2006.
Distance Learning and Accreditation Heather G. Hartman, Ph.D. Brenau University Online Studies and SACS Liaison.
Assessing Information Literacy with SAILS Juliet Rumble Reference & Instruction Librarian Auburn University.
Performance Accountability System. PAS Overview Performance Accountability System (PAS) was developed by the Technical College System of Georgia (TCSG)
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
Accreditation 101 Julie Bruno, Sierra College Glenn Yoshida, Los Angeles Southwest College Roberta Eisel, Citrus College, facilitator Susan Clifford, ACCJC,
Council March PREVIOUS Reductionistic Whole = Sum of the Parts A Snapshot of the institution at a specific moment in time NEW Synergistic Whole.
Strategic Planning. Where are you? Where are you going? Where should you be going? How do you get there? 4 Core Questions.
Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.
A Commitment to Continuous Improvement in Teaching and Learning Michaela Rome, Ph.D. NYU Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment.
October 14, 2014 Reaffirmation of UofL.
Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Re-affirmation of accreditation in
Demonstrating Institutional Effectiveness Documenting Using SPOL.
ACS WASC/CDE Visiting Committee Final Presentation Panorama High School March
HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
SACSCOC Fifth-Year Readiness Audit
Institutional Effectiveness Plan
Assessment Cycle and Academic Effect
NICC Self-Study The Road to Excellence
What’s New at ACCJC? PRESENTERS
Effective Practices in Accreditation: Standard I Mission, Academic Quality and Institutional Effectiveness, and Integrity Stephanie Curry—Reedley College.
Vernon Martin, ASCCC Accreditation Committee, Sierra College
Assessment components
Presentation transcript:

CONNECTING the DOTS Student Learning Outcomes Commission on Colleges Achieving Excellence Committee

EXAMPLE The purpose of this set of slides is to “connect the dots” and (hopefully) demonstrate the first listed function of the Achieving Excellence Committee (AEC)

“1. Monitor compliance with, and ensure accountability for assessment-related requirements of SACS, THECB, and the federal government.”

This fall, ACC will submit its Fifth-Year Interim Report to SACS Commission on Colleges.

The Fifth-Year Interim Report includes ACC’s response to concerns of the last visiting committee –Board/President relationship –Faculty credentials

And evidence of compliance with selected –Core Requirements, –Comprehensive Standards, –and Federal Requirements (an Abbreviated Compliance Certification)

Additionally, sometime prior to the opening of the Round Rock campus, ACC will submit a Substantive Change Prospectus.

The Substantive Change Prospectus includes Information related to the “change” A Faculty Roster, and An Abbreviated Compliance Certification

Both the Interim Report and the Prospectus will include an abbreviated Compliance Certification. The following slides will illustrate ACC’s evaluation of compliance with Comprehensive Standard (CS) in the Abbreviated Compliance Certification, as reported in our 2006 Prospectus for the South Austin Campus.

Comprehensive Standard states “The Institution identifies expected outcomes,

Comprehensive Standard states (cont.) Assesses the extent to which it achieves those outcomes,

Comprehensive Standard states (cont.) And provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results

Comprehensive Standard states (cont.) in each of the following areas: Educational programs, to include student learning outcomes

Comprehensive Standard states (cont.) Administrative support services [have indirect relationship with students]

Comprehensive Standard states (cont.) Educational support services” [have direct relationship with students]

NOTE: In 2006, Comprehensive Standard was stated slightly differently than it is now. However, to illustrate AEC’s first listed function, the following slides use the 1/2008 wording of the CS and the 2006 “response,” as submitted in our South Austin Campus Substantive Change Prospectus Abreviated Compliance Certification.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS (educational programs to include student learning outcomes) were The Instructional Program Review (IPR) process –Including the IPR Quality Improvement Plan The U-LEAD process

From the SAC Prospectus re: Instructional Program Review Faculty… use a broad range of data to determine the effectiveness of their program… standard information about the program’s students, enrollments, completions, faculty, budgets,

… data from the program’s SWOT (Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis

…other environmental impacts that may affect the program. (Example: [8] )[8]

From the SAC Prospectus re: IPR Quality Improvement Plan The Quality Improvement Plan [9] is used to update curriculum as needed or to provide input to the Master Plan and budget development processes.9

From the SAC Prospectus re: U-LEAD …educational programs establish learning outcomes assessment plans for their departments: a) [Faculty] define the unit purpose

From the SAC Prospectus re: U-LEAD b) state intended educational results and criteria it will use to determine whether those outcomes have been achieved;

From the SAC Prospectus re: U-LEAD c) define and implement the assessment methods, analyze and report results.

From the SAC Prospectus re: U-LEAD …[Develop] plans for improvement and [an] analysis of how improvement plans have impacted the intended outcome.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS (administrative support services) were Internal College Survey (ICS) ICS Improvement Plans

From the SAC Prospectus re: Internal College Survey (ICS) Staff members in administrative and educational support services use the results of the ICS in planning their quality improvement activities.

From the SAC Prospectus re: ICS Improvement Plan process …units not meeting a minimum standard must develop an improvement plan.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS (educational support services) were Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures for –Student Services areas –Adult Education/GED/ESL – Developmental Education

From the SAC Prospectus re: Educational Support Services The Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures identify quantitative goals and targets for the Intended Outcomes [2].2

From the SAC Prospectus re: Educational Support Services Functional areas use the Core Indicators results to monitor and guide improvements to programs and services.

From the SAC Prospectus re: Educational Support Services the Institutional Planning Committee reviews the results of the Core Indicators [4] and[4]

From the SAC Prospectus re: Educational Support Services …incorporates initiatives for improvements into the Master Plan development process [5].[5]

YOU Judge Compliance

…Identifies expected outcomes… EvidenceGrade Instructional Program Review Quality Improvement Plan U-LEAD Internal College Survey ICS Improvement Plan Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures

… Assesses the extent to which it achieves those outcomes … EvidenceGrade Instructional Program Review Quality Improvement Plan U-LEAD Internal College Survey ICS Improvement Plan Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures

…and provides evidence of improvement based on the analysis of the results… EvidenceGrade Instructional Program Review Quality Improvement Plan U-LEAD Internal College Survey ICS Improvement Plan Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures