HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, 2015 10:40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Practical Guide. The Handbook Part I BCCC Vision of Assessment Guiding Principles of Assessment Part II The Assessment Model Part III A guide on how.
Advertisements

Using the New CAS Standards to Assess Your Transfer Student Programs and Services Janet Marling, Executive Director National Institute for the Study of.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Tribal Colleges & Universities Chief Academic Officers 3 rd Annual Meeting 1 Wisdom Sharing: Assessment and Academic Program Review Dr. Koreen Ressler,
Summer Institute, May16,  Peer review process that evaluates educational programs and services for quality.  Transferability of credit hours.
ARIZONA WESTERN COLLEGE ASSESSMENT & PROGRAM REVIEW.
WASC Accreditation Process DUE Managers Meeting December 2, 2009 Sharon Salinger and Judy Shoemaker.
WASC Accreditation Standards and Process August 31, 2006.
The Accreditation: The Policies on Distance Learning.
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
Sub-theme Three The Self-Assessment Process and Embedding QA into the Life of an Institution by Terry Miosi, Ph.D. UAE Qualification Framework Project.
Illinois Community College Board DUAL CREDIT: Proposed Rule Revisions & Updates.
Assessment & Evaluation Committee A New Road Ahead Presentation Dr. Keith M. McCoy, Vice President Professor Jennifer Jakob, English Associate Director.
Federal Emphasis on Accountability in Higher Education and Regional Accreditation Processes Carla D. Sanderson Commissioner, Southern Association of Colleges.
Overview Changes in the re-accreditation process since 2007 Assessment Resources.
Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.
GUIDELINES ON CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR PROGRAM ACCREDITATION (AREA 1, 2, 3 AND 8)
Basic Workshop For Reviewers NQAAC Recognize the developmental engagements Ensure that they operate smoothly and effectively” Ensure that all team members.
CEPA Programs – Accrediting Concerns Presenters: Dr. Deborah Loper, Assistant Vice President of Institutional Effectiveness at Colorado Mountain College.
ACCREDITATION Goals: Goals: - Certify to the public and to educational organizations that the school is recognized as an effective institution of learning.
AASCB The Assurance of Learning AASCB Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business Marta Colón de Toro, SPHR Assessment Coordinator College of.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT ON AREA 1, 2 AND 3 Prepared By: Nor Aizar Abu Bakar Quality Academic Assurance Department.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
Assessing and Planning for Institutional Effectiveness Jasmine R. Ray AVP for Planning and Effectiveness 8/26/15.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
SACS-CASI Accreditation and the Library Media Program in Public Schools Laura B. Page.
Distance Learning and Accreditation Heather G. Hartman, Ph.D. Brenau University Online Studies and SACS Liaison.
WASC Western Association for Schools and Colleges.
Office of Service Quality
School for Academic Administrators: Learning Objectives Rodney A. Webb, Associate Vice-President, Academic January 24, 2005.
Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.
Criterion 1 Mission A. The institution's mission is broadly understood within the institution and guides its operations. B. The mission is articulated.
HLC Criterion Five Primer Thursday, Nov. 5, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
IS GCC MEETING ITS MISSION AND GOALS? MASTER PLANNING COMMITTEE (TEAM A) MAY 8, 2015.
Facult Retreat January 2010 Graham Benton, WASC Coordinator, Accreditation Liaison Officer
HLC Criterion Three Primer: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support Thursday, September 24, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Standard Two Les Steele Executive Vice President.
Model of an Effective Program Review October 2008 Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
1 Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the Basics.
AQIP Categories Category One: Helping Students Learn focuses on the design, deployment, and effectiveness of teaching-learning processes (and on the processes.
Using VE-135 Data and Other CCCS Data to Prepare for Accreditation
Higher Education and Training Awards Council
CRITERION 4 Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
Lead-Off Batter: Applying New Accjc standards
Development of Key Performance Indicators: Lebanese Case Study
Data You Can Use for Accreditation
Assessment Basics PNAIRP Conference Thursday October 6, 2011
Department of Political Science & Sociology North South University
Achieving the Dream Mark A. Smith.
Program Quality Assurance Process Validation
Curriculum & Accreditation: You Can Get There from Here
Curriculum and Accreditation
Programme Review Dhaya Naidoo Director: Quality Promotion
Curriculum and Accreditation
Building Partnerships:  How the Office of Assessment and Accreditation Can Help You and Your Program Be Successful.
HLC Day February 13, 9:30am - 2:00pm, TUC Great Hall.
Outcome Assessment Using a Total Quality Management Paradigm
HLC Comprehensive Reaccreditation: Open Forum for Criteria 3 and 4
Middle States Update to President’s Cabinet October 8, 2018
UMKC General Education Revision - Background June 7, 2016
Accreditation and curriculum
Student Learning Outcome Assessment Plan
ACCJC Standards Adopted june 2014.
Program Review Teaching and learning committee Santa ana college
Presented by: Skyline College SLOAC Committee Fall 2007
Finalization of the Action Plans and Development of Syllabus
Standard II Randy Beach, ASCCC South Representative Stephanie Droker, Vice-President, ACCJC Deborah Wulff, Vice-President of Academic Affairs, Cuesta College,
TLQAA STANDARDS & TOOLS
CURRICULUM AND ACCREDITATION
Presentation transcript:

HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center

Criterion Four. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement

The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

Core Component 4.A: The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs.

The institution maintains a practice of regular program reviews. The institution evaluates all the credit that it transcripts, including what it awards for experiential learning or other forms of prior learning. The institution has policies that assure the quality of the credit it accepts in transfer.

The institution maintains and exercises authority over the prerequisites for courses, rigor of courses, expectations for student learning, access to learning resources, and faculty qualifications for all its programs, including dual credit programs. It assures that its dual credit courses or programs for high school students are equivalent in learning outcomes and levels of achievement to its higher education curriculum.

The institution maintains specialized accreditation for its programs as appropriate to its educational purposes.

The institution evaluates the success of its graduates. The institution assures that the degree or certificate programs it represents as preparation for advanced study or employment accomplish these purposes. For all programs, the institution looks to indicators it deems appropriate to its mission, such as employment rates, admission rates to advanced degree programs, and participation rates in fellowships, internships, and special programs (e.g., Peace Corps and Americorps).

HLC Core Component 4.A. The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs. Adequate but could be improved

Where appropriate, the courses and programs have approval from entities such as the Kansas Department of Education and the Kansas Board of Nursing. Dual- enrollment courses are approved by the appropriate academic department and in coordination with the appropriate high school curriculum.

Donnelly College reviews transfer statistics to identify the success of students transferring to another institution to further their degree.

Donnelly College needs to review programs through a systematic program review process.

Core Component 4.b: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning.

The institution has clearly stated goals for student learning and effective processes for assessment of student learning and achievement of learning goals. The institution assesses achievement of the learning outcomes that it claims for its curricular and co-curricular programs.

The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning. The institution’s processes and methodologies to assess student learning reflect good practice, including the substantial participation of faculty and other instructional staff members.

HLC Core Component 4.B. The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning. Adequate but could be improved

Donnelly College outlines a clear process for assessing student learning which was developed with input from members representing various levels of leadership, academic departments (faculty and administrators) and student support services.

Donnelly’s assessment process includes matrices, templates to guide data collection and established stages in students’ academic status or periods of enrollment (i.e., entry, mid-point, completion and post-completion); and the timeline allows for reflection on the outcomes.

All assessment reports are reviewed by the assessment committee to ensure that adequate information is included as well as other comments and suggestions. It is not evident as to how co- curricular outcomes are assessed.

Core Component 4.c: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and completion rates in its degree and certificate programs.

The institution has defined goals for student retention, persistence, and completion that are ambitious but attainable and appropriate to its mission, student populations, and educational offerings. The institution collects and analyzes information on student retention, persistence, and completion of its programs.

The institution uses information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs to make improvements as warranted by the data.

The institution’s processes and methodologies for collecting and analyzing information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs reflect good practice. (Institutions are not required to use IPEDS definitions in their determination of persistence or completion rates. Institutions are encouraged to choose measures that are suitable to their student populations, but institutions are accountable for the validity of their measures.)

HLC Core Component 4.C. The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and completion rates in its degree and certificate programs. Adequate but could be improved

Donnelly College has established admission standards for some programs, along with remediation programs (Conditional Admission and GED preparation) to support the learners as they attempt to reach the admission competency level.

Donnelly College indicates that it monitors institution retention, persistence and completion rates at the institutional level but has not indicated the same for degree and certificate programs.

Donnelly College participates in the CCSSE (Community College Survey of Student Engagement), along with other student surveys and end of course surveys, but the data is discussed in regard to the institution as a whole not in reference to each degree or certificate.