1 / 20

MM s of Institutional Effectiveness Compliance

radha
Download Presentation

MM s of Institutional Effectiveness Compliance

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. M&Ms of Institutional Effectiveness Compliance Ed Rugg Kennesaw State University http://sacs.kennesaw.edu

    2. Has the challenge of satisfying SACS requirements in IE been reduced under the Principles ? Apparently, NOT !

    3. As Many As 2/3 Tripped Over IE In 2006

    4. IE Potholes ( Ranked by Size ) CS 3.3.1 / 3.4.1 CS 3.5.1 CS 2.5

    5. How is IE in CR 2.5 Different from CS 3.3.1 ? Clarified in 2007 2.5 is institutional and mission/goal-driven 3.3.1 is program/service focused and outcomes heavy

    6. Warning ! Respond fully to literal interpretations of all key words and phrases

    7. Outcomes Ambiguity in CS 3.3.1 What are expected outcomes ? Are they program outcomes? What are student learning outcomes? Are they course objectives?

    8. Look to the Literature on Student Learning Outcomes CHEAs statement Standards for other regional's-Middle States, North Central, New England APA Cyber guide

    9. Some Simple Definitions Program Outcomes: How an educational program is expected to perform on various indicators of quality, productivity, and viabilitythe focus of program review and program evaluation. Student Learning Outcomes: What an educational programs graduating students are expected to know (knowledge), be able to do (skills), and value (attitudes)the focus of capstone assessments.

    10. M&Ms Led to KSUs Sweet Success in IE Compliance MULTIPLE METHODS of Planning & Evaluation that led to what MATTERS MOST: MEANINGFUL MAJOR MACRO-LEVEL MULTI-YEAR MISSION-DRIVEN IMPROVEMENTS

    11. KSUs Multi-Year Focus For CR 2.5 A Decade of KSUs Transformational Changes Documented For CS 3.3.1 Major Improvements in Programs and Services--Last 5 Yrs

    12. KSUs Focus on a Major Membership KSUs Planning, Evaluation & Improvement Processes Operate Under the Direction of the University System of Georgias and its Statewide Governing Board

    13. KSUs Macro-Level Focus: Meaningful Improvements We documented KSUs climbs to the summits, the peak experiences of IE. We focused more on the big picture, than on independent trees in the forest.

    14. KSU Recognized its Multiple Methods of Planning & Evaluation * It takes lots of different tools to keep up and improve the IE yard.

    15. KSUs Mission-Driven Focus 2.5 The University Systems and KSUs mission and strategic goals were core elements of the case for compliance 3.3.1 Outcomes for programs & services were documented in the context of USG/KSUs strategic priorities

    16. The institution identifies expected outcomes First-Rate Educational Programs Leadership in Educational Technology Facilitating & Improving Student Success Efficient Expansion of Facilities & Resources Faculty & Staff Development Enrollment Growth

    17. KSUs Dual Focus on Assessing Educational Outcomes CPR for Program Outcomes AOL for Student Learning Outcomes

    18. Need Some Bedtime Reading? See KSUs Complete Story in its Compliance Assurance Report at http://sacs.kennesaw.edu

    19. KSU Believes that Quality Enhancement Matters Most Planning & Evaluation Processes Yielding Improvements that Matter is Quality Enhancement

    20. The Last M Lets Move now to your Questions and Evaluations

More Related