1 / 32

Special AHECB Meeting

Special AHECB Meeting. July 26, 2012. Rick Jenkins Associate Director, Planning and Accountability. Agenda item no. 1 college-going rate of public high school graduates. Methodology Has Changed. New methodology focuses on students that

haroun
Download Presentation

Special AHECB Meeting

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. Special AHECB Meeting July 26, 2012

  2. Rick Jenkins Associate Director, Planning and Accountability Agenda item no. 1college-going rate of public high school graduates

  3. Methodology Has Changed • New methodology focuses on students that • graduated from an Arkansas public school district in Academic Year 2010-2011, • are first-time entering students in 2011 Fall term, and • are Arkansas residents. • This new methodology more closely follows that used by the National Center for Education Statistics (NECS). However, there are three differences: • 1. NCES filters by the age range of 16-24. ADHE ignores age but focuses on high • school graduates from the previous year; • 2. NCES includes GED students as their report is based on a survey. ADHE does not • have data on annual graduating classes of GED students; and • 3. Since the NCES report is a survey, it may include private high schools and home • school students. ADHE has no data on annual graduating classes of private high • schools or home school students. • Therefore, the new methodology is a College-Going Rate calculation for Arkansas public high school graduates only.

  4. Methodology Has Changed The Old Methodology Did Not Measure College-Going Rate The old methodology consisted of the Fall student cohort including (1) first-time, (2) full-time, and (3) on-campus that attend an Arkansas public or independent institution after completing high school or GED.

  5. Public High School Grads College-Going Rate

  6. Grads Attending Public Institutions College-Going Rate for Public Institutions Only

  7. College-Going Rate By Gender

  8. College-Going Rate by Race/Ethnicity

  9. College-Going Rate By County

  10. College-Going Rate By District

  11. Where They Attend

  12. Cynthia Moten Associate Director, Academic Affairs Agenda item no. 2Surf 2011-12 program report

  13. Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) Act 2124 of the 2005 transferred administrative responsibility for SURF to ADHE. SURF applications are scored by college faculty with doctoral degrees in the disciplines to be reviewed. Funding appropriation is $150,000 per year, except in years 2010 & 2011 which were $300,000.

  14. Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) The Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) awards fellowships to undergraduate students at Arkansas 2-year and 4-year institutions to encourage these students to conduct in-depth research projects under the tutelage of a tenured or full-time faculty member serving as a mentor. $4,000 maximum award is comprised of a student award, mentor award, travel cost & institutional match. Recipients agree to present the results of his/her research at a state or national conference or to attend a meeting of experts in his/her discipline.

  15. Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) Academic YearAwardsAward Amount 2005-06 70 $149,988 2006-07 66 $146,356 2007-08 80 $175,315 2008-09 66 $150,000 2009-10 135 $311,655 2010-11 132 $312,860 2011-12 76$179,911 Total Awards 626 $1,428,735

  16. Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) 2011-12 Applicants STEM 163 412,639 Non-STEM 76 171,409 Total 239 584,048 Awardees STEM 42 105,277 Non-STEM 34 74,634 Total 76 179,911

  17. Total Awards for All Institutions from 2005-2012

  18. Student Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) Student Summaries Zain Chauhan, ASUN, Science/Allied Health Mentor – Mrs. Elizabeth Ashcraft, Assistant Professor “Influences of Waste Water Discharge on Village Creek in Jackson County, AR” Kathryn Watkins, UAF, Social Work Mentor – Dr. Alishia Ferguson, Assistant Professor “How Does Knowledge (about mental health) Affect Attitudes Among College Students?” Jessica Hartman, UALR, Chemistry Mentor – Dr. Jerome Darsey, Professor “Development of New Methods for Recycling Polystyrene and Waste Wood Products for Producing Composite Building Materials”

  19. Cynthia Moten Program Specialist, Academic Affairs Agenda item no. 3academic program 2010-12 Review

  20. Academic Program Review Arkansas Code §6-61-214 requires that the AHECB review existing academic programs at Arkansas public colleges and universities. The existing academic program review policies (AHECB Policy 5.12) were adopted in 1988 and revised in 1995, 1998, and 2008.

  21. Academic Program Review Purpose: To identify certificate and degree programs not meeting minimum standards of quality and viability; and, To establish schedules for either resolving these concerns or removing the programs from the AHECB approved program inventory.

  22. Academic Program Review Beginning Fall 2010, all certificate and degree programs offered by Arkansas colleges and universities must be reviewed by external consultants over a 7-10-year period and the findings from the reviews will be reported annually to the Board. Programs that are accredited/licensed/state certified will follow the usual review practices and schedule of the accrediting/approval body.

  23. Academic Program Review Process for review of programs that are not program-specific accredited: Institution prepares the self-study document for the external reviewers; The external reviewers prepare their report for the institution using the self-study document and the external reviewers’ template. Report should be submitted to the institution within six weeks; and, Institutions should submit the external reviewers’ written evaluation and their response to ADHE within six weeks of receipt of the written evaluation.

  24. Academic Program Review The following is a summary of the Institutional Self-Study Guidelines: Goals, Objectives, and Activities Curriculum Program Faculty Program Resources Program Assessment Program Effectiveness

  25. Academic Program Review External Reviewers guidelines: Review of Program Goals, Objectives, and Activities; Program Curriculum; Academic Support; Program Faculty; Program Resources; Program Effectiveness; Instruction by Distance Technology, if applicable; Program Research & Service; Local Reviewer Comments; and Report Summary

  26. Academic Program Review Frequently Asked Questions What is the purpose of the Academic Program Review? Which programs need to be reviewed? Which programs will be reviewed by external reviewers? When must an out of state reviewer be used? How many are required? What credentials/ qualifications must they possess? Can I change my review schedule once it’s submitted to ADHE?

  27. Academic Program Review Accredited Programs Summary Reviews for all accredited/licensed/state certified programs during this review cycle have been received. All programs have been renewed for continued approval. Institutions have responded to accreditor’s concerns and suggestions.

  28. Academic Program Review Summary for programs that are not accredited/licensed/state certified Reviews were conducted according to AHECB Policy 5.12. Institutions have responded to reviewers’ concerns and suggestions. 2-year institutions plan to collaborate on state-wide reviews for the AAT, AA, and other similar programs that are not accredited/licensed/state certified.

  29. Cynthia Moten Associate Director, Academic Affairs Agenda item no. 4FACULTY PERFORMANCE Review

  30. Faculty Performance Review • Each college and university conducts an annual performance review of faculty members. • Faculty performance was assessed using a variety of methods including assessment by students, classroom visits by administrators, peer review, and self-evaluation activities.

  31. Mr. Kaneaster Hodges Chairman, Director Search Committee Agenda item no. 5committee update

More Related