Session 6 2:30pm-4:00pm Site Visitor Training Facilitators:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PAINLESS PERIODIC REVIEW Cynthia Steinhoff Anne Arundel Community College Arnold, Maryland.
Advertisements

NASPAA Accreditation Serving on a Site Visit Team.
NASPAA Accreditation Accreditation as a process. InputsOutputs Outcomes Inputs  Classrooms  Syllabi  Library resources  PhD faculty  … Outputs 
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
 The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is a voluntary, non-governmental, membership association that is dedicated to quality assurance and.
ADEPT Framework
Engaging the Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky Working Together to Prepare Quality Educators.
Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.
October 2, 2010 Las Vegas NASPAA S ITE V ISITOR T RAINING.
Working Definition of Program Evaluation
Full Implementation of the Common Core. Last Meeting Performance Tasks Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Upcoming Accountability Measure Strong teaching.
ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES IN DEGREE PROGRAMS CSULA Workshop Anne L. Hafner May 12, 2005.
Standard Two: Understanding the Assessment System and its Relationship to the Conceptual Framework and the Other Standards Robert Lawrence, Ph.D., Director.
External Review Team: Roles and Responsibilities A Very Brief Training! conducted by JoLynn Noe Office of Assessment.
Workshop For Reviewers Operating the Developmental Engagements Prof. Dr. Hala SalahProf. Dr. Hoda ELTalawy.
Peer reviewer Workshop Presented by: Prof. Dr. Hussein Mahmoud El Magraby National Quality Assurance & Accreditation Project.
Assessment of Student Learning: Phase III OSU-Okmulgee’s Evidence of Student Learning.
Introduction to the quality system in MOHE Prof. Hala Salah Consultant in NQAAP.
The North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Process November 1, 2012
North Carolina Standard for School Executives Standard 1 By: Barbara Bumgardner Aleen Besmer James Westbrook Kristy Christenberry.
Strategic Plan: Goals, Objectives & Success Measures Administrative Forum, South Campus June 17,
DO PRINCIPAL SUPERVISORS MATTER? BUILDING THE CAPACITY OF AREA SUPERINTENDENTS National Principal Supervisor Summit May 2016.
Queen’s Teaching Awards QUB Teaching Awards Aims of the Briefing Session To raise awareness of the Queen’s Teaching Awards Scheme To encourage colleagues.
Academic excellence for business and the professions CASE The accreditation event: roles and expectations Gill Harrison 1st September 2014.
1 Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the Basics.
Academic Program Review Workshop 2017
CBU CALIFORNIA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY Assessment, Accreditation, and Curriculum Office CBU - OIRPA.
NCATE Unit Standards 1 and 2
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT and PROCESS
Maja Holmes and Margaret Stout West Virginia University
Queen’s Teaching Awards 2017
Harvesting the Benefits of QM Culture for Institutional Accreditation
Program Review For School Counseling Programs
Orientation for New Site Visitors
Department of Political Science & Sociology North South University
The Development of a Competency Map for Population Health Education
Center For Faculty Excellence: Leadership and Faculty Development
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE WORKSHOP
Jeff McCoy, Executive Director of Academic Innovation & Technology
2016 NASPAA Accreditation Institute
NICC Self-Study The Road to Excellence
Collaborative Inquiry and Professional Learning Communities
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
Board and Staff Roles 2014 Capacity Building Institute
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
The BVSD Curriculum Essentials Document
Time Line for Program Reviews
Introduction to the training
Accreditation 2016 A student’s guide.
Neelam Soundarajan Chair, Undergrad Studies Comm. CSE Department
Implementing Race to the Top
Instructional Methods Lessons Learned & Next Steps
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
February 21-22, 2018.
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Time Line for Program Reviews
Session 1: How to Have an Effective Meeting
Fort Valley State University
NON-ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING FY’17
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE WORKSHOP
Key Elements of the Self Study Process
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
TLQAA STANDARDS & TOOLS
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Get on Board: Reaffirmation 2016
Welcome to the 2019 NASPAA Accreditation Institute!
Presentation transcript:

Session 6 2:30pm-4:00pm Site Visitor Training Facilitators: Jade Berry James, North Carolina State University Charles Menifield, Rutgers University - Newark

Site Visitor Foundations Value of Site Visiting Feedback Sharing new practices Networking Roles and responsibilities of Site Visitors “Eyes and Ears” of COPRA Report on Standards through Evidence, without judgment Confidentiality Working effectively as a team Collaborate early and often Prepare in advance 1. Goals for Site Visit Preparation Session a. Become Familiar with Accreditation Process and NASPAA Standards b. Preparation requirements for service as a Site Visitor 2. NASPAA Mission and Role of Accreditation a. Excellence in Education & Training for Public Service b. Peer Review – Formative & Evaluative Processes 3. Assessment Tenants a. Mission Based; Outcomes Oriented; Public Service Oriented 4. Accreditation Process and Steps a. Self-Study Report (August); COPRA Interim Report; Program Response; Site Visit (Spring); Site Visit Report; Program Clarification; Program Final Response; COPRA Decisions (July) 5. Roles and responsibilities of site visitors a. ‘Eyes and Ears’ of COPRA b. Report on Standards without Judgment - Evidence c. Confidentiality 6. Site Visit Team a. Chair, Academic, Practitioner b. Review and managing multiple reports c. Work effectively as a team, and i. Responsibilities of individual members and the team before, during and after a site visit. ii. Responsibilities of site visitors to prepare in advance and to, wherever possible, notify the program of additional data/documentation needs in advance. iii. What to Avoid 7. Value of Site Visit a. Feedback, Sharing New Practices, Network

Accreditation Process & Reports Self-Study Report Interim Report Program Response External Site Visit (Draft Report, Program Response, Final Report) COPRA Decision (may include Monitoring) Annual Reports (required) Key elements for the AI workshop is in program management and in documenting program management in the Self-Study Report

NASPAA Accreditation Standards Program Strategic Management (first among equals!) Program Administration & Governance Faculty Qualifications, Diversity, Performance Student Services, Diversity Student Learning Program Resources Program Transparency & Communications Review the standards. Emphasize the importance of mission. S1: Mission, performance expectations, program evaluation (performance outcomes & ongoing assessment processes St 2 Modalities, admin capacity, decision-making authority, faculty governance, nucleus, substantial determining influence S3 AQ/PQ, faculty diversity S4 Recruitment, admits, acceptances, enrollments; internships, completion rates, placements; student diversity S5 , S6, S7…

Guiding Questions What information do you need? How will you obtain it? Data sources? Qualitative vs. quantitative Triangulation of multiple data sources Writing the Site Visit Team Report: How will you document your findings in Report? How do you balance formative & summative?

Case and Case Questions Read Interim Report Distribute Example 3 Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Case and Case Questions 1. What are the strengths of the mission statement provided in relation to the Standards. What are the weaknesses? Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Case and Case Questions 2. During the Site Visit, who would you want to meet with to address COPRA’s Interim Report concerns? What questions might you ask? Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Case and Case Questions 3. What supporting documentation might you need to see to explore the issues raised in the interim report and provide evidence back to COPRA? Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Case and Case Questions: Item 4 To date, we have completed one cycle of assessment. During 2016-17 and 2017-18 academic years, we considered Competency 5 “to communicate and interact productively with a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry.” We did this using a sample of papers students had written in our Ethics course as well as completed capstones, and a student exit survey. Our data show that students generally felt good about the skills they acquired in these courses. We did see one item of concern—students reported that while they felt confident in their written and oral skills, they had been exposed to few opportunities to explore cultural interactions. Based on this, we have revised the way we teach our capstone course to incorporate more attention to this. Otherwise, we have been pleased and have made no other changes as a result of our analysis. What open questions remain for you? Thinking about what you would explore deeper on the ground, what would you report to COPRA?

Case and Case Questions 4. Writing a Response (Item 4) Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Scenarios for Site Visit Teams On the Ground Conduct Site Visit Report Ask COPRA liaison Same questions as above Plus: Is this linked to a standard? If not, do not cite.

Final Lessons Learned At every meeting, communicate: The site visit is a collegial activity designed to improve programs and, thereby, the profession and public service You do not speak for COPRA, you report to COPRA The site visit report is a piece of the entire puzzle The Program has an opportunity to comment on a draft of the SVT Report, and Collegiality on the visit does not mean a positive decision Manage expectations Ask members of the audience for their questions or advice they would give to members of a SVT

Reflection What will you take away from this session? Track on flip chart

Mission-driven Outcomes-oriented Evidence-based Accreditation-earning Program Management Many thanks to all of you who have served on accreditation teams or who plan to do so. You will learn a great deal and you will contribute to the profession.

…is not only about voluntarily conforming to standards set by NASPAA for educational programs in public service. …is also about pursuing excellence in public service through education by executing well on a mission-based strategy. Finish up promptly at 4:00 pm