1.  Accreditation: ◦ Purpose ◦ Guiding Principles  Accreditation Standards Development Working Group ◦ Members ◦ Goals  Proposed Framework for Standards.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mandate: To make a recommendation to the PDEP Steering Committee on an Accreditation Model for dietetic education and practice Model Structure: Shall.
Advertisements

ACCREDITATION Community Day February 1, Significance of Accreditation Accreditation – Accreditation – Allows the students at KC to apply for Federal.
Foundations of Excellence ® in the First College Year (4-year institutions) Salisbury University Project Description of Review Process of First College.
Campus Improvement Plans
As presented to the Global Colloquium on Engineering Education Deborah Wolfe, P.Eng. October 2008 The Canadian Process for Incorporating Outcomes Assessment.
Conceptual Framework What It Is and How It Works Kathe Rasch, Maryville University Donna M. Gollnick, NCATE October 2005.
PREPARING FOR SACS Neal E. Armstrong Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs July 13, 2004.
WASC Accreditation Process DUE Managers Meeting December 2, 2009 Sharon Salinger and Judy Shoemaker.
Institutional Accreditation Review Christine M. Ladisch Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Getting Prepared:
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
The SACS Re-accreditation Process: Opportunities to Enhance Quality at Carolina Presentation to the Faculty Council September 3, 2004.
Institutional Accreditation Review by Christine M. Ladisch Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Getting Prepared:
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Reaffirmation of Accreditation: Institutional Effectiveness Southern Association of Colleges and Schools February 2008 Stephen F. Austin State University.
A Possible SE 685 Project Automated Reviewers’ Report For ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
Session Goals: To redefine assessment as it relates to our University mission. To visit assessment plan/report templates and ensure understanding for.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT
Consultation on Draft Accreditation Standards for Dietetic Internship/Practicum Programs Summary of Findings Presentation for PDEP Annual Meeting June.
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE WORKSHOP
Accreditation – Australia’s system Assoc Prof Peter Hendicott Head, School of Optometry and Vision Science Queensland University of Technology Brisbane.
Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.
Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
Deconstructing Standard 2c Dr. Mike Mahan Gordon College 1.
 This prepares educators to work in P-12 schools (1)  It provides direction (1)  It is knowledge-based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
ACCREDITATION Goals: Goals: - Certify to the public and to educational organizations that the school is recognized as an effective institution of learning.
EDU 385 CLASSROOM ASSESSMENT Week 1 Introduction and Syllabus.
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AUDIT ON AREA 1, 2 AND 3 Prepared By: Nor Aizar Abu Bakar Quality Academic Assurance Department.
1 SCU’s WASC Reaccreditation Diane Jonte-Pace, Self Study Steering Committee Chair Don Dodson, Academic Liaison Officer Winter 2007.
Program Framework Review November 2011 Pamela Miller, Ph.D. AVP for Learning.
2006 Fall Workshop PLANNING and ASSESSMENT: A TUTORIAL FOR NEW DEPARTMENT CHAIRS – A REFRESHER COURSE FOR OTHERS.
The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment
A Collaborative Approach to Workforce Development Kim Barro Hosted by the Pan Canadian Task Force on Public Health Nutrition Practice CPHA Conference June.
1 Roles and Responsibilities of The Learning Evidence Team at CCRI Presented at CCRI Peggy Maki
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
SACS Leadership Retreat 9/23/ Western Carolina University SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation Frank Prochaska Executive Director, UNC Teaching.
SUBMITTED TO THE HIGHER LEARNING COMMISSION OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS MAY 2010 Progress Report on Outcomes Assessment.
2012 Middle States Accreditation Report Review Chapter 1: Institutional Excellence Standards 1 and 6.
Continuous Improvement. Focus of the Review: Continuous Improvement The unit will engage in continuous improvement between on-site visits. Submit annual.
SACS-CASI Accreditation and the Library Media Program in Public Schools Laura B. Page.
Accreditation Collier County Public Schools Fall 2015.
Accreditation (AdvancED) STANDARD #2: GOVERNANCE & LEADERSHIP
STRATEGIC PLANNING & WASC UPDATE Tom Bennett Presentation to Academic Senate February 1, 2006.
Distance Learning and Accreditation Heather G. Hartman, Ph.D. Brenau University Online Studies and SACS Liaison.
Dr. Salwa B. El-Magoli 16/1/2007Dr.Salwa B. El-magoli Cairo: 16/1/2007 Quality Assurance and Accreditation (The Egyptian Experience) Dr. Salwa B. El-Magoli.
Moving Successfully Toward SACS Reaffirmation: An Introductory Discussion Presenters Dr. Cathy Fleuriet Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness.
ACCREDITATION STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING NOVEMBER 20, 2012.
1 Michigan State University Preparation for EC 2000 Thomas F. Wolff, Ph.D., P.E. Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies College of Engineering Michigan.
February, MansourahProf. Nadia Badrawi Implementation of National Academic Reference Standards Prof. Nadia Badrawi Senior Member and former chairperson.
 Developing a State Model for Student Support Services Personnel Evaluations Bureau of Exceptional Education & Student Services & Division of Educator.
A Commitment to Continuous Improvement in Teaching and Learning Michaela Rome, Ph.D. NYU Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment.
Deconstructing Standard 2c Laura Frizzell Coastal Plains RESA 1.
CAA Review Joint CAA Review Steering Committee Charge Reason for Review Focus Revision of Policy Goals Strategies Milestones.
The University of West Florida Reaffirmation of Accreditation Project Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges.
4/16/07 SACS Reaffirmation Process Susan P. Himburg SACS Director of Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
 Theresa Glanville  Heidi Bates  Isabelle Giroux  Katherine Vandenbussche  Fern Hubbard  Marlene Wyatt.
External Review Exit Report Campbell County Schools November 15-18, 2015.
INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT DR. SHEMEKA MCCLUNG DIRECTOR ARNITRA HUNTER RESEARCH ASSOCIATE.
HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
1 Institutional Quality and Accreditation: A Workshop on the Basics.
Academic Program Review Workshop 2017
Presenters: Lisa McLaughlin, Institutional Data Coordinator
Presented by: Skyline College SLOAC Committee Fall 2007
NON-ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING FY’17
NON-ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT REPORTING FY’17
TLQAA STANDARDS & TOOLS
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Presentation transcript:

1

 Accreditation: ◦ Purpose ◦ Guiding Principles  Accreditation Standards Development Working Group ◦ Members ◦ Goals  Proposed Framework for Standards  Timeline & Consultation Process  Ideas to Share 2

 The purpose of accreditation is to ensure quality dietetic education within academic and internship programs and to encourage programs to strive for quality improvement.  Accreditation is based on meeting nationally recognized standards that have been accepted by the key national stakeholders of the profession – professional association, regulatory bodies and the educators. 3

Accreditation:  It is a voluntary, peer-review process that assesses the quality of both new and established educational programs.  It requires continuous program assessment and evaluation against accreditation standards as will be determined by the future governing body for accreditation. 4

 The accreditation standards are outcome based and prepare graduates to meet the Integrated Competencies for Dietetic Education and Practice (ICDEP).  The assurance of a nationally consistent quality dietetic education serves the interest of the general public, students, regulatory bodies, and the profession. 5

Dietetic Education Representatives: ◦ Heidi Bates, University of Alberta, Edmonton ◦ Isabelle Giroux, Brescia University College, London ◦ Theresa Glanville, Mount Saint Vincent, Halifax ◦ Katherine Vandenbussche, Sunnybrook, Toronto Alliance of Canadian Dietetic Regulatory Bodies Representative ◦ Fern Hubbard, College of Dietitians of British Columbia Dietitians of Canada Representative ◦ Marlene Wyatt, Director of Professional Affairs 6

 Goal: ◦ Develop new accreditation standards for academic & internship/practicum programs based on Integrated Competencies for Dietetic Education & Practice.  To date: ◦ Reviewed education standards from 17 programs (including Dietetic programs in USA & Australia). Currently developing draft accreditation standards.  Next steps: ◦ Complete draft standards and consultation process. ◦ Prepare draft accompanying documents to support the accreditation review process. 7

 Accreditation Standards ◦ One set of standards for academic and internship/practicum programs ◦ Criteria are used to assess whether a standard will be met. ◦ Each criterion will include “Evidence” on how to meet each criteria. 8

Standard 1 Criteria A Evidence a. Evidence b. Evidence c. Criteria B Evidence a. Evidence b. Evidence c. Criteria C Evidence a. Evidence b. Evidence c. 9

Standard: Curriculum Criterion: The curriculum is based on the ICDEP competencies. Evidence:  The curriculum description in the university/organization course calendar or internship manual indicates that the program supports the achievement of the ICDEP competencies.  The course outlines or internship objectives describe the competencies that are addressed within each course or internship/ practicum rotation. 10

1. Program Governance & Administration – Focuses on organizational support for the program from the institution and program level. 2. Program Structure - Focuses on the philosophy and objectives. 11

3. Student Policies and Services - Focuses on policies and organization/ program services available to support students in the program and to ensure appropriate learning opportunities. 4. Curriculum - Focuses on student centred and based on achieving the Integrated Competencies for Dietetic Education and Practice. 12

5. Faculty and Professional Staff – Focuses on faculty and professional staff with appropriate academic and dietetic qualifications and experience. 6. Resources – Focuses physical, financial, learning, technology/information resources and support personnel to provide quality programming. 13

7. Program Evaluation - Focuses on broad based, systematic and continuous evaluation processes that use evaluation outcomes to maintain or improve program quality. 14

 Draft standards, criteria and evidence developed by early fall  Broad Based Consultation – Fall through November ◦ We need your suggestions on cost effective methods for consultation  Final Draft to PDEP Steering Committee – December  Implementation – to be determined by PDEP Steering Committee 15

 Ideas to share with us as the working group ◦ Consultation/engagement suggestions ◦ 16