Mission fulfillment: How do we know?

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

NWCCU Standards for Accredition The new process. Revised NWCCU Accreditation Standards New Standards: reduced from 9 to 5 Standard One--Mission, Core.

Advertisements

AccreditationEncore New Standards, New Thinking & Next Steps.

President’s Cabinet April 12,  Process review  The “why” for the plan  The draft plan  Q & A  Implementation.

Accreditation Update COLLEGE of Alameda Spring 2015.

NWCCU New Accreditation Process Dave James, Gail Griffin Office of the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs.

Example Mission: To prepare students for today’s careers and tomorrow’s opportunities.

WTCS Framework for Student Success WTCS Board Meeting March

2012 Self-Evaluation Report Update 7/27/11 1. LAHC 2012 Self-Evaluation Report Update 7/27/11 All Accreditation Commission recommendations successfully.

Monitoring Report 2015 – 01 Global Ends Statement.

Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.

Accreditation Update COLLEGE of Alameda Fall 2014.

Developing the Year One Report: WVC’s Experience as a Pilot College Dr. Susan Murray Executive Director, Institutional Effectiveness.

REPORT TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 7, 2012 SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT INSTITUTIONAL.

1 SCU’s WASC Reaccreditation Diane Jonte-Pace, Self Study Steering Committee Chair Don Dodson, Academic Liaison Officer Winter 2007.

SPRING 2014 CONVOCATION. AGENDA Organizational Chart Revisions and Reporting Structure Key Elements to Turn Planning Into Action Accreditation.

Columbia Basin College Plenary I: Mission and Mission Fulfillment Rich Cummins Melissa McBurney 1.

QEP Topic Reveal QEP Core & Implementation Teams December 2015.

Coastal Bend College Strategic Plan Update of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) Spring 2013.

Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.

Revisiting Our Institution-Set Standards: Part II Bri Hays Campus-Based Researcher Presented to the Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Committee.

CAA Review Joint CAA Review Steering Committee Charge Reason for Review Focus Revision of Policy Goals Strategies Milestones.

Accreditation 2007 Undergraduate Council September 26, 2005.

4/16/07 SACS Reaffirmation Process Susan P. Himburg SACS Director of Reaffirmation of Accreditation.

LSSU Assessment Timeline Phase I (Completed by December 2009) –Create Institutional Assessment Structure –Create Department Assessment Teams –Write College.

Development of Statewide Community College Value- Added Accountability Measures Michael J. Keller Director of Policy Analysis and Research Maryland Higher.

1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.

Strategic Enrollment Management

Achieving the Dream Student Success and Completion

Discipline/Department Improvement Process (DIP) and Program Improvement Process (PIP) at WCC Monday, November 19, 2012.

Accreditation Update Board of Trustees Meeting January 9, 2013

Assessment Basics PNAIRP Conference Thursday October 6, 2011

Outcomes Assessment Committee

Objectives How reliable are the student success measures that are reported to the Board of Trustees? How accurate is the underlying student record data.

UAA Effectiveness and Improvement

LASC 2010 Program Review Orientation

How an Assessment Framework helped revitalize Program Review at JCCC

District Strategic Planning

Institutional Effectiveness Plan

Student Success Metrics

Data that will be presented at the Trustees (TACTC) workshop

D Adapted from: Kaplan & Norton The YCCD District Mission, Vision, Values & Goals are Foundational to College Planning. All College EMP work aligns.

Dean, Research, Planning & Institutional Effectiveness

Doctorate of Physical Therapy

Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update

Assessment Presentation

5 Year Program Planning Process for year

Dean, Research, Planning & Institutional Effectiveness

Using Student Achievement Data to Measure College Performance (Measuring Up) These metrics were first developed in summer 2013 by the state board for use.

Timeline for STAAR EOC Standard Setting Process

Accreditation Summary

NWCCU update February 13, 2018.

Dean, Research, Planning & Institutional Effectiveness

2008 ARCC Report Findings February 2, 2009

2009 ARCC Report Findings October 5, 2009

Accreditation Year One Report Fall 2009 Update

Academic Advising 101.

Wednesday March 11, 2015 Board of Trustees Meeting

Implementing Race to the Top

Governance Institute for Student Success (GISS) Wed

Evergreen Valley College Accreditation Update October 20, 2014

Accreditation & Institution Set Standards

CUNY Graduate School and University Center

Local Goal Setting & SEA Plan Introduction & Overview

Start with PROGRAM REVIEW

2010 ARCC Report Findings May 3, 2010

Presentation transcript:

Mission fulfillment: How do we know? Board of Trustees Meeting Wed. October 9, 2013

Goals for today Timeline Progress on recommendations Indicator examples Mission fulfillment discussion Provide an opportunity for feedback

Timeline May 30th – receive report from NWCCU Dec. Board meeting – update March 3rd – Year three report due Today Nov. 30th – finalize indicators, objectives, core themes, mission fulfillment definition Dec. 31st – finish draft of report March 24-26 – virtual visit by NWCCU

NWCCU Recommendations Report Recommendations Year 1 (spring 2012) 1. Articulate mission fulfillment 2. Identify measurable indicators Ad hoc (fall 2012) 1. Complete development of outcomes and begin to assess outcomes

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services Course completion: The average successful completion rate for college-level courses exceeds ___%

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services Course completion: The average successful completion rate for college-level courses exceeds ___% Retention: Faculty and administrators apply retention data to improve programs and services

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services Course completion: The average successful completion rate for college-level courses exceeds ___% Retention: Faculty and administrators apply retention data to improve programs and services Retention: The one-year retention (persistence) rate for academic-transfer students exceeds ___%

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services Course completion: The average successful completion rate for college-level courses exceeds ___% Retention: Faculty and administrators apply retention data to improve programs and services Graduation: Faculty and administrators apply graduation data to improve programs and services Retention: The one-year retention (persistence) rate for academic-transfer students exceeds ___%

Indicators Year 1 report Year 3 report Course completion: Faculty and administrators apply course completion data to improve programs and services Course completion: The average successful completion rate for college-level courses exceeds ___% Retention: Faculty and administrators apply retention data to improve programs and services Graduation: Faculty and administrators apply graduation data to improve programs and services Retention: The one-year retention (persistence) rate for academic-transfer students exceeds ___% Graduation: The three-year graduation rate for academic-transfer students exceeds ___%

Academic progress: Students are retained in and complete degrees and certificates (2012-13) For one indicator (CCR), we exceeded the target; for 2 indicators our actual figures are between our target and minimum acceptable thresholds; and for 1 indicator our actual 3-year grad rate is lower than the minimum. So what we are considering doing is rolling up the indicators and defining mission fulfillment at the objective level. So for this objective, “acad. progress”, on a green-yellow-red scale we’ve given ourselves a yellow. 5-year graduation rate is 24%. Interpretation: In 2012-13, WCC’s overall course completion rate was 79% (which exceeded WCC’s target of 78%). Note: The target and minimum values are hypothetical.

Mission fulfillment Finalize core themes. Finalize objectives for each core theme. The status of the indicators for each objective determines if the objective is satisfied. Satisfaction of at least ___% of objectives defines mission fulfillment.

Standard Two – Resources and Capacity Consists of 7 elements and 85 criteria. For each criteria, we consider two questions: Does Whatcom meet the standard defined by the Commission? If yes, provide the evidence, and if no, explain our plan to become fully compliant.

Questions?