1 / 36

Understanding and Adapting to the New SACS/COC Process: The APSU Accreditation Review Project

Understanding and Adapting to the New SACS/COC Process: The APSU Accreditation Review Project. Austin Peay State University. SACS/COC 2004 Reaffirmation of APSU Presentation to Western Carolina University September 23, 2004. SACS Accreditation Review Project. September 2004

reginald
Download Presentation

Understanding and Adapting to the New SACS/COC Process: The APSU Accreditation Review Project

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. Understanding and Adapting to the New SACS/COC Process: The APSU Accreditation Review Project Austin Peay State University SACS/COC 2004 Reaffirmation of APSU Presentation to Western Carolina University September 23, 2004 SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  2. Facts About APSU • Member of the 2004 Cohort • Compliance Audit, August 2003 • Quality Enhancement Plan, January 2004 • On-site Review, April 2004 • Public, Comprehensive University • Headcount = 8,000 • Located in Northern Middle Tennessee (40 miles NW of Nashville) • Governed by the Tennessee Board of Regents (nation’s 6th largest system) Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  3. President’s Perspective • President’s past experience with SACS/COC • Commission member and Executive Council member • Visiting Team Committee Chair • President of institution that successfully completed an alternate self-study • HIGH expectations Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  4. Process - Initial Concerns • Senior executive team and academic leadership’s limited direct experience with SACS process • Institutional effectiveness • Lack of centralized documentation • Credentials of selected faculty • Decentralized adjunct file locations • Lack of standardized process for exceptions • Library resources • Documentation, Documentation, Documentation Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  5. At the December 2001 SACS/COC Annual Meeting… SHOCK Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  6. ANGER Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  7. DISMAY Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  8. Academic VP Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis I’ve been on the job for less than a year. . .

  9. Faculty Co-chair Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis What have I gotten myself into?

  10. SACS Liaison Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis I’d better think of a way to get this done right!

  11. ProcessRethinking Our Strategy • Scrapping of old process and team structure • New team leadership • Attend orientation and training sessions • Speed up the redesign of IE program & documentation • Organizing for dual processes • Compliance Audit • Web-based Reporting • Pluses and minuses • Quality Enhancement Plan Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  12. IETSDocumenting Existing Activities • Over 20 yrs of Performance Funding in Tennessee • Program accreditation or 5-yr program reviews • General education testing • Major field testing • Student, Alumni, and Employer surveys at institutional level and some disciplines • Strategic planning process up-to-date • Department annual reports Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  13. IETSDocumenting Existing Activities • APSU was failing to document assessment and results • APSU was failing to meet the spirit and intent of institutional effectiveness • “Closing the loop” at all levels of the institution Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  14. IETSDetailed Information for Each Unit Objective • Objective • Implementation Strategy • Assessment Criteria • Actual results • Action taken • Barriers to Achievement • Need for further action • Further resources needed Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis Access to sample IETS pages through http://www.apsu.edu/sacs/iets.htm

  15. IETSObservations After Three Cycles • System can be and is very flexible and constantly “tweaked” • University has managed to take the potentially abstract concept of IE down to a process that incorporates day-to-day activities of units … rather than the opposite Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  16. Organizing and Completing the Compliance Audit Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  17. Compliance AuditHuman Side • “Streamlined” Internal Review • 1993 APSU Self-Study • 48 members in 8 committees • 2003 APSU Comp. Audit • 19 members in 9 subcommittees Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  18. Compliance AuditHuman Side • Subcommittees • Core Req.; CS on Mission, Governance, and Admin • Institutional Effectiveness • Educational Programs • Advising • Faculty • Library & Learning Resources • Student Affairs and Services • Financial and Physical Resources • Federal Mandates Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  19. Compliance AuditThe Essentials • Each Core Requirement and Comprehensive Standard • Statement of requirement/standard • Judgment of compliance (Yes, Partial, No) • Proof/Explanation • Plans for compliance • Documentation Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis Done Twice: “Dry-run” and “Official”

  20. Compliance AuditHuman Side • Timeline and Process • Inst. Orientation w SACS (Spring ’02) • Organizational Mtg. (Aug. ’02) • Progress Report Meetings (Nov. ’02) • Draft Deadline (Dec. ’02) • Proofing and Editing (Spring ’03) • Dry-run of CA (May ’03) • Final Edits (Summer ’03) • Submission of CA (Aug. ’03) • Off Site Review (Sept. ’03) • Conference Call (Oct. ’03) • Follow-up Reports on 16 Items (Feb. ’04) • On Site Visit (Apr. ’04) Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  21. Compliance AuditTechnical Details • Web-based Reporting • Standardized Template for Compliance Audit • Faculty Credentials System • Institutional Effectiveness Tracking System Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis Access to all info through http://www.apsu.edu/sacs

  22. Responding to the Off Site Review of the Compliance AuditThe “Optional” Focused Report Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  23. Focused ReportThe Essentials • For Each Core Requirement and Comprehensive Standard Judged as “Not Compliant” or “Unable to Determine Compliance” by the Off Site Review Team • Statement of Requirement/Standard • Institutional understanding of oral report from SACS/COC staff • Institutional response • Supporting documents referenced in response Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  24. The Quality Enhancement Plan Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  25. Quality Enhancement PlanHuman Side • Leadership Team • QEP Planning Committees • Freshman Course • Advising • Student Life & Support Services • Data Analysis • Early Alert • Network of Support Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  26. Quality Enhancement PlanHuman Side • “Broad-based” Planning Committee • 46 members in 5 subcommittees • Administration, Faculty, Staff, and Student Representation Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  27. Quality Enhancement PlanThe Essentials • Required of the entire plan and reflected in all action items • Widespread participation in development • Increase the effectiveness of some aspect of educational programming relating to student learning • Grounded in assessment and use of empirical data and analysis • Sufficiently broad in scope to be viewed as significant to the institution • Proof of resources to deliver on promise • Detailed plan for assessment of the QEP Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  28. Quality Enhancement PlanHuman Side • Timeline & Process • Discussion of QEP w Campus Constituents (Aug.-Sept. ’02) • Organizational Meeting (Oct. ’02) • Committee Work (Nov.-May ’03) • Reports & Recommendations (May ’03) • Drafting & Editing (June-Nov. ’03) • Final Edits (Dec. ’03) • Submission of QEP (Jan. ’04) • Onsite Review and Approval (Apr. ’04) • QEP Follow-up Report (2009) Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  29. Reflecting upon the Experience Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  30. Major Changes to Day-to-Day Campus Activities • Centralization of Academic Personnel Files • Integration of Faculty Teaching Credentials System • Emphasis on Academic Audit • Integration of the Institutional Effectiveness Tracking System • Documentation system to continue through 2014 • Quality Enhancement Plan: 2006, 2009, 2014 (possibly) Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  31. In Reflection • Started too late to prepare (only 2 years in advance of visit) • As an institution, we had not consistently monitored SACS compliance since the last 10-year reaffirmation • Failed to recognize that off-site review team would not access all electronic documents or could not ask for hard copies Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  32. In Reflection • Did not adequately monitor the progress of the QEP and CA committees to ensure that all were on the right track • QEP • Made some assumptions in advance of data analysis, thus not achieving the full benefit of the process and restricting the outcome Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  33. In Reflection • Take advantage of two key publications • Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation • Matrix in the back serves as a “cheat sheet” for reviewers on CA • QEP “must statements” all are found in the booklet as well • Handbook for Review Committees Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis Sadly…neither of these publications were available during CA or QEP development for APSU

  34. What We Did Right • Selection of team leaders • Commitment to quality report • Writing ability • Technological expertise • Development of user-friendly IETS • Selection of QEP topic that addressed a major institutional weakness • Broad-based involvement in QEP • Attention to Details Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  35. What We Did Right • APSU completed SACS Reaffirmation on April 6-8 • Received ZERO recommendations in Compliance Audit and Quality Enhancement Plan Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

  36. The Leadership Team AFTER the SACS Visit Austin Peay State University SACS Accreditation Review Project September 2004 Dr. Houston D. Davis

More Related