St. Petersburg College: Fifth Year Interim Report Dr. Julia Pet-Armacost Dr. Robert L. Armacost SACSCOC Steering Team March 1, 2013

Overview  FYIR requirements  How is SPC doing?  Who is the reviewer?  Critical success factors  What makes a good narrative? March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC2

March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC3 SPC Fifth Year Interim Report  Mini-compliance certification  Due: September 15, 2013  Part III: 17 standards Two Core Requirements Six Comprehensive Standards Nine Federal Requirements  Part V: QEP Impact Report

March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC4 How Are You Doing?  Seven months from submission  Very complete initial drafts  No obvious fatal flaws that can’t be fixed  GOOD WORK!

March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC5 What’s Next?  Narratives not perfect  One chance to provide evidence  Must be sufficient to demonstrate compliance  Communication challenge

Standards Requiring Attention March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC6

Communicate To Whom?  Review team  Experienced reviewers for specific standards  Reviewing documents from multiple institutions  Expecting to easily see evidence  Do not intend to look for evidence to make your case for you March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC7

Review Teams  Reviewers are your peers  Reviewers will probably read your document on their laptops while sitting in their living rooms in Mississippi, Texas, Virginia, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina Possibly slow internet connections They still have a day job May not read the entire report May be from “Missouri”  Reviewers will vary in their interpretation of the same evidence  Incomplete evidence will lead to interpretations based only on reviewer’s experience 8Fifth Year Interim Report for SPCMarch 1, 2013

Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC9 Critical Success Factors  Address every element in the standard and only address the elements in the standard  Organize the content and use subtitles related to the elements in the standard  Keep each narrative as self-contained as possible  Try to avoid language that is specific to your institution  Remember that integrity is key  KISS principle

SACSCOC Guidance for Reviewers _SEPT2010%20_2_.pdf (October 2010) _SEPT2010%20_2_.pdf  Narrative statement Statement is focused solely on the requirement and addresses each of the components of the requirement  Rationale Clear and concise statement of the reason(s) for the assertion regarding the institution’s perception of compliance with the requirement  Evidence—at least three of the following Reliable, current, verifiable, coherent, objective, relevant, representative  Evidence-based analysis of compliance Addresses all aspects of requirements in coherent, concise and focused manner 10Fifth Year Interim Report for SPCMarch 1, 2013

SACSCOC Guidance for Reviewers _SEPT2010%20_2_.pdf (October 2010) _SEPT2010%20_2_.pdf  Overall judgment of case for compliance It directly addresses all aspects of the requirement The evidence provided is sufficient The analysis provided is sufficient The case is coherent 11Fifth Year Interim Report for SPCMarch 1, 2013

Policies and Procedures--Guidance  Applies whether SACSCOC-mandated or internal SPC policy or procedure  Policy or procedure Is in writing and has been approved through appropriate institutional processes Is published in appropriate institutional documents accessible to those affected by the policy or procedure Is implemented and enforced by SPC. If you have never had to apply the policy (e.g., removal of a Trustee), say so. See March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC12

What Makes a Good Narrative?  Start with a brief summary/abstract Do not repeat the standard Briefly describe the evidence that shows why you are in compliance Make it usable for the reviewer to cut and paste into her report  Do not use future tense—it shouts “NON- COMPLIANCE”.  Do not make the reviewer have to search for evidence to make the case for you.  Make sure that you address each point in the requirement or standard. March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC13

What Makes a Good Narrative?  Consider using an outline to structure the narrative to create the story line.  Consider using a format with appropriate headings to direct the reviewers focus.  Include references whenever you make an assertion.  Only include references that are needed to support the narrative—no extra uncited references.  Use relevant excerpts from references Include relevant content in the narrative Put a box around it in the attachment Do not force the reviewer to search through the whole reference to find the relevant information March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC14

What Makes a Good Narrative?  Do not use superlatives (e.g., outstanding program) without evidence. This is not a PR marketing document. It is better to be modest and direct Do not challenge the reviewer to find unsubstantiated claims  Do not include material that is not directly relevant to the standard. If you raise it, it is fair game for the reviewer to find problems.  Be PARISMONIOUS. Use as much relevant narrative as needed to make the point, but do not include more.  Limit the use of acronyms. March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC15

What Makes a Good Narrative?  Read each reference carefully. There may be some content that you did not intend to share.  The reviewers do not know anything about how higher education works in Florida.  If you are not in compliance or partial compliance, say so and present an action plan.  Use the spelling and grammar checkers.  Have someone else review your narrative. March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC16

Questions and Discussion  More to follow in individual sessions  Thank you and good luck on your accreditation journey. March 1, 2013Fifth Year Interim Report for SPC17 ???