Overview of Institutional Accreditation AASCU Conference, Beijing, China 20 October, 2007 Jean Avnet Morse President Middle States Commission on Higher.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Interpreting & Applying the Standards October 4, 2006 Dr. Luis J. Pedraja, Vice President Middle States Commission on Higher Education.
Advertisements

Evaluator 101: An Introduction to Serving as a MSCHE Evaluator Dr. Luis G. Pedraja MSCHE Vice President.
Substantive Change Requesting Commission Approval of Substantive Changes at Institutions MSCHE Annual Meeting December 2009.
PAINLESS PERIODIC REVIEW Cynthia Steinhoff Anne Arundel Community College Arnold, Maryland.
Entry Requirements for U.S. Accreditation Hellenic American Union, Athens, Greece October, 2007 Jean Avnet Morse President Middle States Commission.
Understanding Middle States Expectations for Assessment
Follow-up Reporting Expectations Part II MSCHE 2009 Annual Conference Mary Ellen Petrisko.
Universidad del Sagrado Corazón
Substantive Change Process
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
IMPLEMENTING EABS MODERNIZATION Patrick J. Sweeney School Administration Consultant Educational Approval Board November 15, 2007.
EVALUATOR ORIENTATION Serving on Off-Site and On-Site Committees OVERVIEW.
ACCREDITATION Community Day February 1, Significance of Accreditation Accreditation – Accreditation – Allows the students at KC to apply for Federal.
Understanding MSCHE Expectations for Assessment Linda Suskie, Vice President Middle States Commission on Higher Education 3624 Market Street, Philadelphia.
Orientation for New Site Visitors CIDA’s Mission, Value, and the Guiding Principles of Peer Review.
 2009– LA Delta Initially Accredited by SACS  July 2010 – Tallulah & Lake Providence Consolidated with LA Delta  July 2012 – LA Delta & NELTC Legislatively.
AQIP: “Academic Quality Improvement Program” Same Great Quality, Less Filling.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards 77th Annual Congress Orlando, Florida Accreditation 101 & Panel Discussion Saturday May 3, :00 – 10:00.
Higher Education Accreditation: A Look at the USA and Japan David Werner Visiting Researcher Local Human Resources and Public Policy System, Open Research.
Faculty WASC Information Session January 18, 2011.
Accreditation: Evolution and New Challenges 2015 Accreditation Institute Constance M. Carroll, Ph.D. Chancellor San Diego Community College District 1.
Why Institutional Assessment is Important for Middle States Adapted (with permission) From Andrea Lex, Who Presented at Stockton September 20, 2010 Facilitated.
What is Middle States, Anyway? Adapted (with permission) From Andrea Lex, Who Presented at Stockton September 20, 2010 Facilitated by Joe Marchetti, Gene.
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
The Middle States Accreditation and Review Process & the ESC Self-Study Center for Distance Learning Craig Lamb – Director of Academic Support Val Chukhlomin.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
 The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is a voluntary, non-governmental, membership association that is dedicated to quality assurance and.
Federal Emphasis on Accountability in Higher Education and Regional Accreditation Processes Carla D. Sanderson Commissioner, Southern Association of Colleges.
Engaging the Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky Working Together to Prepare Quality Educators.
Reaffirmation of WCU General Orientation Wednesday, June 22, 2005 Carol Burton, Director, SACS Review.
Middle States Accreditation at UB Jason N. Adsit Director, Teaching and Learning Center Michael E. Ryan Director, University Accreditation and Assessment.
Preparing for THE Visit: the PA Role in the Institutional Accreditation Report and Visit Ellie A. Fogarty, Ed.D., Vice President Middle States Commission.
ANDREW LAMANQUE, PHD SPRING 2014 Status Report: Foothill Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Accreditation and Self Study Process A presentation by: Joseph Saimon Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) (Director for Development and Community Relations)
By Elizabeth Meade Our Reaccreditation through Middle States Commission on Higher Education Presentation to the Board of Trustees, May 11, 2012.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
 SACSCOC REAFFIRMATION FALL  OBJECTIVES: 1.List key facts related to the SACSCOC reaffirmation process. 2.Verbalize understanding of SACSCOC Principles.
ACCREDITATION Goals: Goals: - Certify to the public and to educational organizations that the school is recognized as an effective institution of learning.
Institutional Accreditation: What is it? Higher Learning Commission accredits degree- granting institutions in the North Central region. Assurance to the.
What could we learn from learning outcomes assessment programs in the U.S public research universities? Samuel S. Peng Center for Educational Research.
Middle States Self-Study Process : 2013 College Senate SUNY Oneonta October 15, 2012.
SACS and The Accreditation Process Faculty Convocation Southern University Monday, January 12, 2009 Presented By Emma Bradford Perry Dean of Libraries.
2006 Fall Workshop PLANNING and ASSESSMENT: A TUTORIAL FOR NEW DEPARTMENT CHAIRS – A REFRESHER COURSE FOR OTHERS.
SACS Review and WCU Training and Orientation Thursday, February 24, 2005 Carol Burton, Director, SACS Review.
2012 Middle States Accreditation Report Review Chapter 1: Institutional Excellence Standards 1 and 6.
WASC “All Hands” Meeting Overview and Update November 12, 2007 D. Jonte-Pace.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
External Review Team: Roles and Responsibilities A Very Brief Training! conducted by JoLynn Noe Office of Assessment.
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
Reaffirmation of Accreditation Overview Western Carolina University Carol Burton, Director, SACS Review.
HIGHER EDUCATION IN THAILAND Mrs.Varaporn Seehanath, Ph.D. Deputy Secretary-General for Higher Education Commission, Thailand 1.
CHB Conference 2007 Planning for and Promoting Healthy Communities Roles and Responsibilities of Community Health Boards Presented by Carla Anglehart Director,
1 Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the Basics.
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
SACSCOC Fifth-Year Readiness Audit
GETTING INVOLVED: VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES AT CAEP
Orientation for New Site Visitors
Curriculum and Accreditation
Building Partnerships:  How the Office of Assessment and Accreditation Can Help You and Your Program Be Successful.
SACSCOC Reaffirmation 2016 Quality Enhancement Plan
Assessment Leadership Day Continuous Program Improvement
University Community Briefing
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study)
Reaccreditation and Illinois
UPRM Self-Study for MSCHE
CUNY Graduate School and University Center
Accreditation: Working towards the self-study
Get on Board: Reaffirmation 2016
Presentation transcript:

Overview of Institutional Accreditation AASCU Conference, Beijing, China 20 October, 2007 Jean Avnet Morse President Middle States Commission on Higher Education 3624 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA USA

Topics Overview of U.S. Accreditation The Accreditation Process Analysis of U.S. Accreditation

Overview of U.S. Accreditation Goals of the American accreditation system: –Assure the public that minimum standards are being met –Provide a mechanism for institutional improvement –Allow for a diversity of public and private institutions –Provide a self-regulating system that reduces government regulation

Overview of U.S. Accreditation contd Evaluation is done through peer review examination of: –Educational programs, student services, financial condition, administrative effectiveness, treatment of students, faculty and staff, and includes all non-degree and specialized programs Role of the government includes: –State: Licensure of institutions to grant degrees –Federal: Provision of loans/grants to students at accredited institutions

Overview of U.S. Accreditation contd Types of Accreditors –7 Regional Accreditors Examine entire institution Similar standards –Specialized and Professional Accreditors Specific programs –National Accreditors Degree-granting & non-degree granting institutions across the U.S. Specialized type of institutions, e.g. distance learning, liberal arts colleges

Overview of U.S. Accreditation contd Middle States Accreditation Standards –Principles of the standards Concern for student learning and other outcomes vs. inputs and processes Concern for flexibility Concern for self-assessment, planning and improvement –Content of the standards Define mission. Engage in ongoing planning regarding resource allocation, finances, personnel and other resources. Offer appropriate courses including general education with student support services and qualified faculty and administration Plan ongoing assessment in the area of student learning and institutional performance

Overview of U.S. Accreditation contd International Accreditation –Locations abroad are reviewed whether operated by a U.S. institution or by a non-accredited partner. –Institutions abroad may be accredited provided that they meet the same requirements as domestic U.S. institutions.

The Accreditation Process There are 4 types of reports that are required from institutions: –The Annual Report or Institutional Profile which provides basic information on the status of the institution. –The Self-Study Report which is prepared every 10 years to provide self-evaluation and planning for the future. –The Periodic Review Report which is submitted 5 years after the Self-Study Report. –The Follow-up Report which provides continued monitoring of the institution, when needed.

The Accreditation Process contd Self-Study and Peer Review –Types of self-study: comprehensive, comprehensive with special emphasis, selected topics, and collaborative reviews. –Organization of the self-study includes a steering committee and subcommittees which report to the steering committee –Timeline of the self-study: a self-study design is created and approved by MSCHE; a self-study report is created by the institution; and evaluation team visits.

The Accreditation Process contd Team Visits –Proposal of prospective team members selected by Commission staff is given to the institution for review. –Team members include: an expert on outcomes assessment, trained by MSCHE; a finance officer; and individuals with special expertise pertinent to the institutions self-study. –Team members serve voluntarily and receive a small honorarium. –The team compiles its findings and offers recommendations of actions to the Commission.

The Accreditation Process contd Types of Actions: –Reaffirmation of accreditation Without conditions With a request for a follow-up report With a request for a follow-up report, followed by a special visit –Deferment of a decision on accreditation –Warning that accreditation may be in jeopardy –Probation –Show cause as to why accreditation should not be removed –Remove accreditation

Analysis of U.S. Accreditation Strengths –Promotes a diversity of institutions –Uses experienced volunteers –Has flexibility in addressing new issues, new types of institutions and providers –Reduces government bureaucracy –Assures public awareness regarding the accreditation status of an institution –Promotes continuous monitoring and continuous planning

Analysis of U.S. Accreditation contd Areas for Improvement –Possible duplication of activities among specialized and institutional accreditors –Varying requirements of accreditation standards within the U.S –Cost of the institutions time and personnel to conduct the self-study –Publics difficulty in understanding an institutions accreditation status, because accreditation does not provide numerical ratings or rankings

Analysis of U.S. Accreditation contd Open Questions in U.S. Higher Education –Should accreditation be national? –Should accreditation be federal? –Should there be standardized tests for the learning of every college graduate? –Are measures such as graduation and job placement rates appropriate indicators of student learning? –Should institutions be ranked? –Should the completed text of self-studies by institutions and reports prepared by teams be publicly available?