1 / 8

Improving Board Oversight of Educational Quality

Improving Board Oversight of Educational Quality. Association of Governing Board Project Drake University (IA) Metropolitan State University of Denver (CO) Morgan State University (MD) Salem State University (MA) St. Olaf College (MN) Rhodes College (TN)

lucien
Download Presentation

Improving Board Oversight of Educational Quality

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. Improving Board Oversight of Educational Quality Association of Governing Board Project Drake University (IA) Metropolitan State University of Denver (CO) Morgan State University (MD) Salem State University (MA) St. Olaf College (MN) Rhodes College (TN) Rochester Institute of Technology (NY) Valparaiso University (IN) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VA)

  2. Strategic Direction • Address the troubling gap between public perceptions of what constitutes academic quality and the complex realities facing institutions and their governing boards • Boards have an opportunity to develop more than a superficial understanding of the nature of teaching and learning

  3. Purpose • Engaging the board in informed appreciation of the work of the institution • Putting learning first • Being responsible - not micromanagement • Strengthening board-faculty interaction

  4. Role of the Board • The curriculum is the faculty’s responsibility; the board’s role is one of collective responsibility but not to question or dictate • Stay focused on “mission-critical” issues • Expect a culture of evidence regarding academic quality • Make reviewing evidence of academic quality and improvement a regular and expected board-level activity

  5. Defining the Territory • How good are our graduates? • Student learning upon graduation • Value added • How good are we at developing our students? • Student retention and graduation • Are our students satisfied? • Periodic stakeholder perceptions and opinions • Do we have the right “mix” of courses? • Determining if we are offering the right things at the right levels in light of the needs • Do we make the grade? • Institutional accreditation

  6. Project Cornerstones • Evidence regarding student learning and educational quality • Institutional processes for educational quality and student learning • Effective strategies for productive faculty and board relations

  7. Timeline of the Project • November, 2012 Project team reviews examples of evidence • Engage with campus constituencies on project/purpose and connection to the strategic plan • January, 2013 Engage the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board • Key questions the Board should explore • Sample models and evidence • Administer pre-survey instrument to communicate project info and gauge level of Board involvement • April, 2013 Board plenary on assessment of educational quality • June, 2013 Review outcomes of the April discussion and provide recommendations for benchmarksand structure for ongoing review

  8. Project Team Deneese L. Jones, Provost Kevin Saunders, Director, Institutional Research and Assessment Craig Owens, Associate Professor, Academic Affairs Faculty Fellow Bill Smith, Drake Board Member, Academic Affairs Committee

More Related