PRESIDENT’S Campus forum November 9, 2010

Dr. Shirley Wagner and Dr. Paul Weizer NEASC Self Study Co-Chairs Key Elements of the Self Study Process Demystifying NEASC

What you’ll hear at this session 1.The basics of accreditation: How does it work? 2.Changes to Process and Current Issues 3.Areas of Emphasis from our Last Review 4.How can you get involved?

How does it work? What are the basics of accreditation?

Accreditation = Standards + Mission + Standards of higher education community Mission of the institution evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence

Accreditation fulfills 2 functions 1.Quality improvement: private function The accreditation process helps the institution improve 2.Quality assurance: public function Does the institution deserve the public trust?

An articulation by the higher education community of what a college or university must do in order to deserve the public trust A framework for institutional development and self-evaluation What are the standards for accreditation?

An articulation by the higher education community of what a college or university must do in order to deserve the public trust A framework for institutional development and self-evaluation What are the standards for accreditation? Quality assurance Quality improvement candor candor candor candor

Development of Accreditation in the U.S. Input Are there enough books in the library? Are the faculty well qualified? Is the curriculum appropriate? ……………………………………. ………………………………………..

Development of Accreditation in the U.S. Input Process Are there enough books in the library? Are students using the books? Are the faculty well qualified? Is the curriculum appropriate? Is there good instructional practice? Do students get practice and feedback? ……………………………………. ………………………………………..

Development of Accreditation in the U.S. Input Process Outcome Are there enough books in the library? Are students using the books? Are students gaining skills of information literacy? Are the faculty well qualified? Is the curriculum appropriate? Is there good instructional practice? Do students get practice and feedback? Are students achieving the learning outcomes of the program and institution? ……………………………………. ………………………………………..

Mission-driven Standards 1.Mission and Purposes 2.Planning and Evaluation 3.Organization and Governance 4.The Academic Program 5.Faculty 6.Students 7.Library and Other Information Resources 8.Physical and Technological Resources 9.Financial Resources 10.Public Disclosure 11.Integrity

Institutional Self-Study Product: The Self-Study Report: 100 pages plus forms Process : Studying the institution against the standards How do we meet the standards? How well do we meet the standards? What are our plans for improvement? Strengthen the culture of inquiry Using evidence Community reflecting together

3-PART FORMAT DESCRIPTION: what do we do? Succinct! APPRAISAL: how well do we do it? Analysis of strengths, concerns PROJECTION: what do we commit to do? Specific plans to address challenges

What is new this review cycle?

Data First Forms A series of forms (at least one for each Standard) designed to allow you to report key institutional data. Many forms ask you to report trends over time. New! A few examples … Std 3:Off-campus locations, distance education Std 4:Enrollment at all levels & locations Std 5:Faculty salaries & assignments Std 6:Admissions, student debt Std 7:Library collections, personnel, instruction, use Std 10: Public disclosure.

What is Data First? – The name says it all!  Each section will begin with a statement of data bringing focus to the report.  What do we have? What’s missing?  Will be distributed to committees for their use as they work on their chapters. “You can see a lot just by looking.” Yogi Berra

ANALYZE THE EVIDENCE WHAT STORY DOES THE DATA TELL? Not just numbers, but how you interpret them Not just what you did, but what you learned from what you did How you used findings to improve (CLOSING THE LOOP) Process – what we DID Process – what we DID Ex: administered survey Ex: administered survey Findings – what we LEARNED Findings – what we LEARNED Ex: faculty and student concerns about advising Ex: faculty and student concerns about advising Results – what we CHANGED Results – what we CHANGED Ex: new student orientation, recognition for advisors Ex: new student orientation, recognition for advisors

EvidenceAnalysis “ There are 754,700 volumes in the library. ” “ This is a 20% increase in 5 years and puts us at the median of our peers. ” “ A syllabus study shows that students in 65% of their classes have assignments that require them to use information resources. ” “ It was not clear that students are expected to use increasingly sophisticated sources of information. ” EVIDENCE & ANALYSIS

GOOD EVIDENCE IS … Intentional, purposeful  Addresses relevant, useful questions  Part of ongoing dialogue, cumulative Interpreted  Numbers don’t stand alone  What do you make of what you see? Integrated, holistic Integrated, holistic  Not just “data dump”  Shows that data is used

Advising supports students with special needs. Faculty use effective teaching styles and techniques. Our campus supports people of diverse backgrounds. The institution ensures the integrity of its finances. Evidence answers “ How Do You Know? ” How do you know??

EMPHASIZE ANALYSIS AND PLANNING DESCRIPTION, APPRAISAL, PROJECTION not Description, Appraisal, Projection

APPRAISAL = analysis What are our strengths? What are our strengths? Where do we need to improve? Where do we need to improve? Evidence Evidence How do we know …? How do we know …? What story do our numbers tell? What story do our numbers tell? What are our trends? What are our trends? How do we compare to our peer institutions? How do we compare to our peer institutions? Reflecting on learning = institutional effectiveness Reflecting on learning = institutional effectiveness Why do we do it this way? Why do we do it this way? What have we experimented with? What have we experimented with? What surprises have occurred? What surprises have occurred? What did we learn the last time we tried XXX? What did we learn the last time we tried XXX? Candor demonstrates institutional strength, credibility Candor demonstrates institutional strength, credibility

PROJECTION = planning Relates directly to Appraisal section Relates directly to Appraisal section Institutional commitments to Institutional commitments to Maintain strengths Address areas identified for improvement Planned follow-up from self-study Planned follow-up from self-study Your “To-Do List” Your “To-Do List”

Areas of Emphasis from our Last Review

Issues Raised Ten Years Ago 1.Engaging in institutional planning that is systematic, broad-based and participatory 2.The continued development of a governance system that supports the accomplishment of the institution’s mission and purpose 3.Continued development of the Leadership College emphasis 4.Using the results of assessment of student learning for improvement 5.Systematically strengthening the systems of academic advising for students

What Have We Done Since? Five Year Report was submitted in 2007 The Report analyzed how each of the five cited areas of emphasis in the 2002 report have been addressed. The Report identified goals for the future which must now be evaluated. We are in much better shape today than we were during our last review. Most of the concerns identified ten years ago are no longer serious issues for us.

Future Plans from our 2007 Five Year Report Review of the college mission, goals, and objectives Continuation of the strategic planning process Development of a comprehensive academic plan and continuation of the program review process Implementation of the newly approved Liberal Arts and Sciences core requirements Further development of the culture of assessment, including annual analyses of the data Annual audits; a capital campaign; the construction of new campus facilities and improvement of existing physical and technological resources Regular review of the college web site for accuracy

How can you help with the accreditation process?

Get Involved! This process can only work if it is broad based and inclusive. Provide thoughts and feedback via: The subcommittees The NEASC web site and address Talk to your colleagues and remain engaged.

THE VISIT THE VISITING TEAM WILL BE ON CAMPUS MARCH 4 -7, 2012!!!! THE VISITING TEAM WILL BE ON CAMPUS MARCH 4 -7, 2012!!!! THEY WILL MEET WITH GROUPS OF FACULTY, STUDENTS AND STAFF. THEY WILL MEET WITH GROUPS OF FACULTY, STUDENTS AND STAFF. THEY WILL WANT TO KNOW WHETHER WE FULFILL OUR MISSION. THEY WILL WANT TO KNOW WHETHER WE FULFILL OUR MISSION. THEY WILL WANT TO KNOW THAT THE SELF-STUDY REFLECTS WHAT THEY SEE ON-CAMPUS. THEY WILL WANT TO KNOW THAT THE SELF-STUDY REFLECTS WHAT THEY SEE ON-CAMPUS.

Time for your comments and questions.