THE EVALUATION AND POST EVALUATION Evaluator Training Workshop November 4, 2014

BASIC PRINCIPLES Peer Evaluation Standards-Based System Relationship to Standards: compliance; substantial compliance; or non compliance

THE PREPARED/RESPONSIBLE EVALUATOR Thoroughly reads the college’s self- evaluation report and materials Thinks broadly Collegial Asks questions Verifies Team (committee) approach Honest and helpful Non prescriptive

TYPES OF EVALUATIONS Year One Evaluation (off site) Mid-Cycle Evaluation (on site) Year Seven Evaluation (on site)

PRE-VISIT ORGANIZATION MEETING (INITIAL ORGANIZING & PLANNING CHECK-IN) Understanding of the following days’ activities and process Initial observations Areas of overlap Meeting changes/additions Assist new evaluators Typically at 4pm at hotel (for on site) Pre-arranged phone conference (for off site)

DAY ONE – INTRODUCTORY MEETING (ON SITE) Generally breakfast at college Led by president of college and chair of committee President welcomes and introduces staff Chair greets and introduces evaluation committee Chair reviews process

DAY ONE – MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS One-on-one meetings Group meetings All-campus meetings (year 7 only)

DAY ONE – COMMITTEE MEETING Generally 4pm Concise and brief reporting by members Note exceptionally strong areas and areas of concern Initial discussion to identify concerns/ recommendations that may need additional follow up Ask for validation by others if appropriate Discuss the next day’s activities

DAY TWO – MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS Continuation of day one There may be additions/changes to your meeting schedule Added focus on areas of concern from day one

DAY TWO – COMMITTEE MEETING Generally 4 pm Share day two findings (BE BRIEF) Decisions about Commendations and Recommendations Identify process/person(s) to write draft for Commendations and Recommendations Initial discussion regarding confidential recommendation to the Commission

COMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; COMPLIMENTS AND CONCERNS (Handbook for Peer Evaluators, pgs ) A Commendation, enumerated at the end of peer ‐ evaluation report, is a laudatory statement agreed upon by the committee. A Recommendation indicates that an institution is not in compliance with one or more accreditation criterion or that it is substantially in compliance with one or more accreditation criterion, but in need of improvement.

COMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; COMPLIMENTS AND CONCERNS (Handbook for Peer Evaluators, pgs ) A Compliment is a congratulatory statement or noteworthy practice or achievement of an area within the institution and may or may not rise to the level of an institutional Commendation. A Concern is intended to be advisory to the institution to indicate that attention to the matter is warranted although it may or may not rise to the level of a Recommendation that requires immediate action.

DAY THREE – COMMITTEE TIME Last minute fact checking Polish commendations and recommendations Decide confidential recommendation to the Commission Provide chair print, and/or flash drive of report sections

Confidential Recommendation Accreditation Status Recommended Action: ◦ Reaffirm accreditation ◦ Grant accreditation ◦ Grant or continue candidacy ◦ Deny accreditation or candidacy ◦ Remove accreditation or candidacy Specific information regarding evaluation of recommendations from previous evaluation report Information about recommendations from current evaluation report

DAY THREE – EXIT MEETING Usually minutes President welcomes Chair thanks Chair explains process Chair reads Commendations and Recommendations

AFTER THE VISIT Chair compiles sections; edits; sends draft #1 to the committee for edits (generally one week) Chair sends draft #2 to college, asking for correction of facts (generally one week) Chair provides final report along with confidential recommendation to the Commission Chair interfaces with Commission along with College President/designee Commission takes action regarding accreditation status (meets twice a year)