1 / 27

The Quality Enhancement Plan from a SACSCOC Perspective

The Quality Enhancement Plan from a SACSCOC Perspective. Leadership Orientation for 2016-A Institutions January 27, 2014 Michael S. Johnson Senior Vice President and Chief of Staff SACSCOC. Goals for this Session. Reasons for a QEP Requirements SACSCOC Resources

adonica
Download Presentation

The Quality Enhancement Plan from a SACSCOC Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Quality Enhancement Plan from a SACSCOC Perspective Leadership Orientation for 2016-A Institutions January 27, 2014 Michael S. JohnsonSenior Vice President and Chief of StaffSACSCOC

  2. Goals for this Session • Reasons for a QEP • Requirements • SACSCOC Resources • Committee Evaluation Criteria • Challenges and Good Practices (mixed in)

  3. What is a QEP?

  4. Why a QEP?

  5. Unique chance to make a difference through accreditation • Best opportunity for engagement in accreditation • Most forward-looking part of reaffirmation

  6. Requirements • Nominate lead QEP evaluator[~3 months before on-site visit] • Submit a QEP document [~6 weeks before on-site visit] • Discuss QEP during on-site visit

  7. Requirements • Response if recommendations received[5 months after visit] • Implement and sustain the plan[continuously through completion] • Impact Report as part of 5th year review [~September 2021]

  8. Resources • Handbook for Institutions Seeking Reaffirmation • Resource Manual • “Institutional Resources” on website • Guidelines Matrix • Summer Institute on Quality Enhancement and Accreditation • Annual Meeting • Staff Advisory Visit

  9. QEP – Committee Evaluation

  10. Committee Review: Areas of Evaluation Core Requirement 2.12 Comprehensive Standard 3.3.2

  11. CR 2.12 Quality Enhancement … includes an institutional process for identifying key issues emerging from institutional assessment …

  12. Institutional Process • How was your topic chosen? • Is there data to support why this topic is important – maybe even transformative – to the institution? • Is the QEP linked to strategic planning and mission? If not, how will it become so linked?

  13. This is YOUR QEP!

  14. Can we use our old QEP as part of our new QEP?

  15. Using Facets of the Last QEP is acceptable IF The new QEP • is derived from an assessment of the previous QEP • has distinct goals and institutional outcomes compared to the first QEP • continues to focus on student learning outcomes and/or the environment supporting student learning and quality enhancement. Resource Manual, p. 30.

  16. CR 2.12 Quality Enhancement … focuses on learning outcomes and/or the environment supporting student learning and accomplishing the mission of the institution.

  17. Focus on Learning • Are there clear links to student learning? • “Environment” should be clearly linked to student learning • Clear goals and objectives • Appropriate for THIS institution • Is scope appropriate?

  18. CS 3.3.2 Quality Enhancement … demonstrates institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and completion of the QEP …

  19. Institutional Capability • Is there a clear, appropriate budget? [affordable, but meaningful] • Are there adequate human resources for the task? • Is there a clear, explicit proposed timeline for completion?

  20. Institutional Capability • Who is in charge? What is the organizational structure? Who reports and to whom? Is this clear to all? • Is the leadership appropriately qualified?

  21. CS 3.3.2 Quality Enhancement … includes broad-based involvement of institutional constituencies in the development and proposed implementation of the QEP …

  22. Broad-based Involvement • Were appropriate constituencies consulted [faculty, staff, students, trustees, external community members]? • Are these constituencies still involved in the planned implementation?

  23. Broad-based Involvement • Focus groups, committee membership, etc. used appropriately? • Have you done your homework? What are good practices on this topic?

  24. CS 3.3.2 Quality Enhancement … identifies goals and a plan to assess their achievement.

  25. Assessment Plan • Clear, specific assessment strategy? • Have specific instruments been identified? • Do the instruments relate to the questions being asked? • Baseline data: For determining how to implement? For comparison/ control purposes?

  26. Assessment Plan • In the end, will you be able to confidently know whether or not the plan made a difference in terms of student learning? • Is your research design something that could be potentially published or gain external funding?

  27. QEP PARTY!

More Related