SACS Workshop Organized by the Office of Planning and Evaluation Methodist College August 18, 2006

1. SACS Workshop Organized by the Office of Planning and Evaluation Methodist College August 18, 2006 Planning & Evaluation

2. Organization of Workshop Part 1: SACS Overview, Our Progress Thus Far, What is Needed at the Department and Course levels (Don Lassiter) Part 2: A Focus on General Education (Emily Wright) Part 3: A Focus on the Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) (Spence Davis) Planning & Evaluation

3. SACS Overview • Just who is SACS anyway? • Philosophy of the accreditation process. • The Principles of Accreditation. • - Core requirements (CRs) – 12 of these. • - Comprehensive standards (CSs) – 57 of these in 10 categories. • - Federal Requirements (FRs). • Steps in the accreditation (reaffirmation) process. Planning & Evaluation

4. Steps in the accreditation (reaffirmation) process: • - Collection and organization of documentation and evidence (ongoing-need minimum of 2 years worth). • - Discussion and decision making regarding documentation and evidence collected (ongoing). • - Orientation of our SACS leadership team (Atlanta-6/07). • - Compliance Certification submitted (9/08). • - Off-Site Review Committee reviews our Compliance Certification (early in 11/08). • - Off-Site Committee gives us its findings; we submit a Focused Report in response (optional, but wise). • - QEP proposal submitted (6 weeks prior to On-Site visit). • - On-Site Review Committee visits campus (sometime between 1/09 and 4/09). Planning & Evaluation

5. Steps in accreditation process (continued) • - On-Site Committee gives us a report of its findings regarding compliance concerns and appropriateness of our QEP. • - We submit a response to SACS regarding On-Site Committee’s findings (if necessary). • - The SACS Commission on Colleges reviews On-Site Committee’s report and our response; makes a decision regarding our reaffirmation (early 12/09). Planning & Evaluation

6. SACS Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards Most Relevant to Faculty Regarding Program and Student Learning Outcomes • CR 2.5: The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement, and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. Planning & Evaluation

7. Important Link to Establish to Help Satisfy CR 2.5 • The link that ties together the college mission statement, college goals relevant to program and student learning outcomes, department (program, major, concentration) goals, course learning objectives, measurement of program outcomes relevant to program goals, and measurement of student learning outcomes relevant to course objectives. • Planning and evaluation efforts are ultimately mission driven. Planning & Evaluation

8. SACS Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards Most Relevant to Faculty Regarding Program and Student Learning Outcomes • CS 3.3.1: The institution identifiesexpected outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; assesses whether it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results. Planning & Evaluation

9. SACS Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards Most Relevant to Faculty Regarding Programs and Student Learning Outcomes • CS 3.4.1: The institution demonstrates that each educational program for which academic credit is awarded (a) is approved by the faculty and the administration, and (b) establishes and evaluates program and learning outcomes. Planning & Evaluation

10. To Summarize Thus Far: • Planning, assessment and evaluation processes are ongoing. • They are systematic. • They are aimed at continuous improvement of program and learning outcomes. • They demonstrate the College is achieving its mission. • Planning identifies expected program and learning outcomes (i.e., program goals and outcomes, course learning objectives). • Assessment provides evidence whether expected outcomes are achieved. • Evaluation involves analysis of assessment evidence and leads to plans for improvement of outcomes. Planning & Evaluation

11. To Summarize Thus Far: • Plans for improvement are then implemented the following year or academic term. • Re-assessment is performed regarding expected outcomes. • Evaluation (analysis) of re-assessment evidence to see if improvement regarding the expected outcomes has taken place. Note: Need to establish, plan, assess, evaluate, and improve expected outcomes at both the program and course levels. Planning & Evaluation

12. Progress Thus Far • All departments have developed goals. • Most departments have statements of learning objectives for their courses. • Some departments have developed assessment strategies: • - Pre- and post-tests. • - Comprehensive final exams (course level assessment). • - Common “core” of comprehensive final exams (program level assessment). • - Rubrics for scoring subjective work. • - Using designated courses to address program goals. Planning & Evaluation

13. Progress Thus Far • - Standardized tests (Major Field Tests, licensing/ certification exams, etc.). • - Capstone courses. • - Internally developed exit exams. • - A variety of other program outcome measures (number of graduates, number of majors, surveys, etc.). • A number of good things are being done; however, • - Not all departments include in their course syllabi department/program goals, learning objectives for courses, how objectives address the goals, and how objectives are to be measured/assessed. Planning & Evaluation

14. Progress Thus Far • - Some departments do not publish their goals in the college catalogue. • - Some departments are collecting good evidence (measures), but documentation is not organized. • - Other departments are not collecting sufficient evidence; some are still only using course grades and student course evaluations (which are not enough). • - To date, only 10 Annual Reports have been received by VPAA and OIRE (out of 40). • - Some of these Reports contain little or no results regarding outcome measures, their analyses, or plans to be implemented to improve outcomes next year. Planning & Evaluation

15. What Departments Need to be Doing • Regarding Course Level Assessment • On course syllabi (or provide an addendum): • - Statement of department (program, major) goals. • - Statement of concentration goals (if applicable). • - List of student learning outcomes (objectives, competencies) for the course. • - Indication of which learning outcomes are relevant to which goals (i.e., show the link). • - Indicate how learning outcomes are to be measured/assessed (tests, papers, projects, etc.). • - Handout: syllabus incorporating the above information. Planning & Evaluation

16. Examples of Student Learning Outcome Measures • Objective tests. • Rubrics for scoring papers, portfolios, projects, presentations, essay questions, musical performances, etc. • Pre- and post-tests. • Comprehensive final exam. • Sub-scores from tests to see how well students achieved certain course objectives. • Student satisfaction measures (i.e., student evaluation of course instruction). Planning & Evaluation

17. Once Student Learning Outcome Measures are Obtained: • Discuss the results at department meeting. • Determine which objectives are not being satisfactorily met according to department/instructor criteria. • From these objectives, select at least one and suggest plans for improvement of student learning outcomes. • Suggestions may include greater focus on relevant course content, change in instructional approach, changing how you measure the outcome, etc. • After department and instructor decide on a plan, implement the plan the next time the course is offered. • Re-measure learning outcomes, and assess whether the plan worked. Planning & Evaluation

18. Adjust plan if necessary and implement again, or • If plan worked (learning outcomes improved sufficiently), select another outcome to address and repeat the process. • This is what is meant by engaging in continuous assessment. • Evidence to support this process may include: • - Course syllabi. • - Relevant excerpts from minutes of meetings. • - Samples of student work. • - Summaries of descriptive data (e.g., means). • - Summaries of data from student course evaluations. • Include course level assessment findings in the Annual Report due 6/30 (documentation is critical). Planning & Evaluation

19. Regarding Program Level Assessment • Base program level assessment on: • - College mission. • - Department goals. • - Program (major, concentration) goals which reflect back on department goals. • - Learning objectives of courses that support program goals. • - Outcome measures relevant to program goals. Planning & Evaluation

20. Examples of Outcome Measures Relevant to Program Level • Major field tests. • Certification/licensing exams (e.g., PANCE for PA program). • Internally developed exit exam for seniors. • Pre- and post-tests given in the introductory course (pre-test) and capstone (post-test) for the major. • Sub-scores from above tests to examine if students achieved certain program goals. • Job placement rates. • Number of graduates. • Graduation surveys. • Annual surveys of students. Planning & Evaluation

21. Graduate surveys 6 months to a few years after graduation • List of employers of program graduates. • Employer surveys. • List of graduate schools accepting your program’s graduates. • Graduate school admission rates. • Graduate school completion rates. Planning & Evaluation

22. Once Program Outcome Measures are Obtained: • Discuss the results at department meeting. • Determine which program goal(s) are not being satisfactorily met according to department/instructor criteria. • From these goals, select at least one goal and suggest plans for improvement . • Suggestions may include: • - Addressing instruction in a course. • - Course redesign. • - Curriculum redesign (add/delete courses). • - Change budget allocation. • - Send faculty to conferences/workshops. Planning & Evaluation

23. - Encourage students to present at meetings. • - Add a GRE/GMAT/MAT, etc., seminar. • - Give students incentives to use the Career Center. • Decide on a plan and implement the next year (may have to wait longer if major curriculum changes are involved). • Re-measure program outcomes, and assess whether the plan worked (i.e., showed improvement toward meeting program goal). • Adjust plan if necessary and implement again, or • If plan worked (i.e., sufficient improvement shown), select another goal to address and repeat the process. Planning & Evaluation

24. Evidence to support this process may include: • - Relevant excerpts from minutes of meetings. • - Testing results. • - Data regarding other program outcomes (e.g., job placement, number of graduates, graduate school admissions, graduate school completion, etc.). • - Summaries of data from surveys (annual student survey, graduate survey, employer survey, post-graduate survey, etc.). • - Copies of conference proceedings, workshop certificates, etc. • Include program level assessment findings in the Annual Report due 6/30. • Documentation is critical. Planning & Evaluation

25. Workshops and Meetings Planned • Rubrics Workshop for faculty (mid September). • Annual Report Workshop for department chairs, school deans, and program/concentration directors (late Sept.). • Individual meetings (by 10/1) with members of the Administrative Committee concerning their assessment plans for their areas – they need to submit Annual Reports as well. • SACS Leadership Team meetings (next one 8/29). • SACS QEP Committee meetings. • Meetings with academic leadership (chairs, deans, program directors). • Getting on the agendas of school and department meetings. Planning & Evaluation