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

2. 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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. 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) 3.3.1 in the Abbreviated Compliance Certification, as reported in our 2006 Prospectus for the South Austin Campus.

10. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states “The Institution identifies expected outcomes,

11. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.) Assesses the extent to which it achieves those outcomes,

12. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.) And provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results

13. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.) in each of the following areas: 3.3.1.1 Educational programs, to include student learning outcomes

14. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.) 3.3.1.2 Administrative support services [have indirect relationship with students]

15. Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.) 3.3.1.3 Educational support services” [have direct relationship with students]

16. NOTE: In 2006, Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 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.

17. In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.1 (educational programs to include student learning outcomes) were The Instructional Program Review (IPR) process –Including the IPR Quality Improvement Plan The U-LEAD process

18. 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,

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

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

21. 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

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

23. 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;

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

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

26. In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.2 (administrative support services) were Internal College Survey (ICS) ICS Improvement Plans

27. 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.

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

29. In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.3 (educational support services) were Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures for –Student Services areas –Adult Education/GED/ESL – Developmental Education

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

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

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

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

34. YOU Judge Compliance

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

36. … 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

37. …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