University-wide Accreditation

1. University-wide Accreditation Academic Leadership Program February 18, 2010

2. Regional Accreditation • Middle States: MSACS/MSCHE • New England: NEASC • Northwest: NCCU • Southern: SACS • Western (CA & HI): WASC • North Central (19 states, Arizona to Ohio): NCA/HLC

3. What regional accreditation does • Evaluates an entire educational organization in terms of its mission and the agency’s standards or criteria. • Accredits the organization as a whole. • Assesses formal educational activities. • Evaluates other aspects with internal and external constituencies. Aspects such as • governance and administration • financial stability • admissions and student services • institutional resources • student learning • institutional effectiveness • relationships

4. The value of accreditation? • Provides both public certification of acceptable institutional quality and an opportunity and incentive for self-improvement . • Critical self-analysis leading to improvement in quality and for consultation and advice from persons from other organizations • Allows students at institution to obtain federal funds. • Self regulation versus politically-motivated government regulation.

5. NCA/HLC North Central Association — one of six regional accreditation associations in the U.S., since 1895. NCA includes institutions in 19 states. The Higher Learning Commission — the official name of the association, adopted in 2000. Over 1000 institutions accredited in region.

6. The Commission’s Requirementsof a Member Institution • Conduct an Institution-wide Self-Study in the Context of the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation • Produce and Submit a Self-Study Report • Host an Evaluation Team

7. Types of Accreditation Processes: AQIP, PEAQ • AQIP: Academic Quality Improvement Plan • Since July 1999 with funding from Pew Charitable Trusts • Infusing principles and benefits of continuous improvement into the culture • “Providing an alternative process through which an already-accredited institution can maintain its accreditation from the Higher Learning Commission.“ • “With AQIP, an institution demonstrates it meets accreditation standards and expectations through sequences of events that align with those ongoing activities that characterize organizations striving to improve their performance. “ • Shift from PEAQ to AQIP: Too easy for PEAQ to be seen as an add-on of work, not continuous improvement.

8. PEAQ: Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality Five-step process • Self-study process (2 years ) with Report • Evaluation team of Consultant- Evaluators conducts comprehensive visit. Writes report to commission on findings. • The documents relating to the comprehensive visit reviewed by Readers Panel or Review Committee. • The Institutional Actions Council (IAC) takes action on the Readers Panel’s recommendation. (If a Review Committee reviewed the visit, the Review Committee takes action.) • The Board of Trustees validates the work of IAC or a Review Committee, finalizing the action.

9. PEAQ Self Study Overview • Re-accreditation is an open, evidence-based process that requires broad participation from across the university—board, students, faculty, staff, and administration. • During this process, a team of faculty and administrators closely examines the role of the university in five key areas, the HLC Criteria for Accreditation: • Mission and Integrity • Preparing for the Future • Student Learning and Effective Teaching • Acquisition, Discovery and Application of Knowledge • Engagement and Service

10. HLC PEAQ Criteria • Criterion One: Mission and Integrity: The organization operates with integrity to ensure the fulfillment of its mission through structures and processes that involve the board, administration, faculty, staff, and students. • Criterion Two: Preparing for the Future: The organization’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its education, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

11. HLC Criteria (cont.) • Criterion Three: Student Learning and Effective Teaching: The organization provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission. • Criterion Four: Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge: The organization promotes a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff, and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice, and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission. • Criterion Five: Engagement and Service: As called for by its mission, the organization identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways both value.

12. Fundamental Shiftsfrom criteria used in 2000 study Outcomes Learning Focus on Future Connectedness, Engagement & Service • Inputs • Teaching • Focus on Past • Autonomy

13. Hallmarks of An Effective PEAQ Self-Study Process • Fits the distinctive nature of the university • Ensures effective evaluation of the whole university • Produces evidence to show that the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation and Core Components are met • Promises to have an impact on the university beyond the Commission visit

14. 2010 Self-study Involves Review of Progress on Earlier Concerns • All accreditation requirements met in 2000 • “…the University continues to offer high-quality academic programs that respond to community needs” • CSU: 2 concerns required progress reports: Assessment and Financial Reserves • Reports accepted without reservations • CSU in good standing with Commission • Other concerns: Enrollment, Integrated University Culture

15. Data Gathering Structure • 5 Criteria • CSU had Criterion Leaders/Key Writers • 21 Core Components • CSU had Core Component Leaders • 182 Evidence Examples (Handbook) • Negotiable • One or more individuals responsible

16. Points Emphasized by Commission • The primary purpose of the self-study report is to demonstrate that regular improvement has occurred at the institution, and that plans and planning processes are in place to ensure that it will continue to occur. • Please note: “Mission” is not a single document. An institution's distinctiveness should be visible in the actions the institution undertakes as a result of that mission.

17. More points emphasized • All material must be thorough, descriptive, and well-documented. Every criterion requires that the institution has proof of its stated achievements. • We’ll have as many as 3000 in our Virtual Resource Room. Probably 500 hyperlinks in 200-page report. • An institution must distinguish itself with the examples it uses. The examples it provides are its opportunities to showcase what distinguishes the institution from everyone else—Mission Differentiation??

18. From you perspective… • What is CSU’s primary mission? Who are we? • In your own words, not from the Mission Statement.

19. Two-year Process • Phase 1 Orientation and Planning • Phase 2 Information Gathering and Analysis • Phase 3 Synthesis and Reporting • Phase 4 Integration and Dissemination • Phase 5 Dissemination, Feedback, Revision, and Submission

20. Comprehensive Site Visit(Ours is Oct. 18-20) • Visiting Team of 6 – 8 (health, urban) • Three days on campus • Interviewing internal and external constituencies • Resource Room made available • Expect requests for additional data and special meetings

21. Campus Community Involvement • Provide Data • Read and respond to the draft reports • Updates • Focused Reviews • Help prepare the campus and community for the team visit.

22. REVIEW • Why do we have university-wide accreditation? • What are the advantages of peer accreditation? • What are the possible concerns?

23. For more information • http://mycsu.csuohio.edu/committees/selfstudy2010/ • http://www.ncahigherlearningcommission.org/ • r.nordgren@csuohio.edu