The 2009-2010 AQIP Steering Committee (ASC): Mr. Don Aungst, CFO Mr. Don Aungst Dr. Dave Chown, CAO Dr. Dave Chown Dr. Scott Figdore, Professor of Science.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Commissions Expectations for the Assessment of Student Learning and Institutional Effectiveness Beth Paul Interim Provost and Vice President for Academic.
Advertisements

EVALUATOR TIPS FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT WRITING The following slides were excerpted from an evaluator training session presented as part of the June 2011.
STRATEGIC PLAN Community Unit School District 300 7/29/
School Improvement Plan 6 Main Areas
The Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model Webinar for Washington State Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project.
A Commitment to Excellence: SUNY Cortland Update on Strategic Planning.
Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools Continuing Accreditation 2005 Self-Study and Site Visit.
AQIP: “Academic Quality Improvement Program” Same Great Quality, Less Filling.
Understanding AQIP (Academic Quality Improvement Project) Some slides and/or information have been borrowed with permission from their originators: 1.
SEM Planning Model.
Performance Appraisal System Update
WASC Accreditation Process DUE Managers Meeting December 2, 2009 Sharon Salinger and Judy Shoemaker.
Institutional Effectiveness Operational Update Presentation made to the Indiana State University Board of Trustees October 5, 2001.
The Academic Assessment Process
The Pathway to Success Goal IV Strengthen & Leverage Programs of Strength and Promise 2 nd Annual Strategic Planning Stakeholders Conference Thursday,
Columbia-Greene Community College The following presentation is a chronology of the College strategic planning process, plan and committee progress The.
2012 West Texas Assessment Conference CREATING A CULTURE OF ASSESSMENT IN NON-INSTRUCTIONAL AREAS KARA LARKAN-SKINNER, DIRECTOR OF IR AND IE & KRISTIN.
Learning Outcomes Assessment RESULTS AND ACTION PLAN Beth Wuest Director, Academic Development and Assessment Lisa Garza Director, University Planning.
Medical School Preparation for LCME Accreditation The University Toledo College of Medicine August 24, 2011 Barbara Barzansky, PhD, MHPE LCME Secretary,
Ensuring the Presence and Fidelity of Effective Classroom Practices to Increase Positive Student Behavior.
Assessment & Evaluation Committee A New Road Ahead Presentation Dr. Keith M. McCoy, Vice President Professor Jennifer Jakob, English Associate Director.
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE WORKSHOP
GTEP Resource Manual Training 2 The Education Trust Study (1998) Katie Haycock “However important demographic variables may appear in their association.
Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.
February 10-12,  AQIP Institutions must attend once every four years with a team of 7-8 members.  2010 team members included: ◦ Dr. Knowlton ◦
1 Focus on Quality and the Academic Quality Improvement Program At Cuyahoga Community College.
Incorporating Student Engagement into the Accreditation Process April 11, 2010.
Setting purposeful goals Douglas County Schools July 2011.
University Planning: Strategic Communication in Times of Change Cathy A. Fleuriet Ana Lisa Garza Texas State University-San Marcos Presented at the July.
University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director.
ACCREDITATION Goals: Goals: - Certify to the public and to educational organizations that the school is recognized as an effective institution of learning.
SACS-CASI Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council on Accreditation and School Improvement FAMU DRS – QAR Quality Assurance Review April 27-28,
NEASC FIVE YEAR REPORT FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE JANUARY 2007.
Meeting the ‘Great Divide’: Establishing a Unified Culture for Planning and Assessment Cathy A. Fleuriet Ana Lisa Garza Presented at the 2006 Conference.
Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science Review and Planning Process Fall 1998.
1 Academic Departments - Compact Planning Details.
MINERAL AREA COLLEGE AQIP DAY. Disclaimer Gyolai is not here representing HLC I am here as a friend of the college.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
AQIP is an accreditation reaffirmation process based on continuous improvement. UIU was accepted into AQIP in 2005 HLC accreditation is either through.
Monitoring and Oversight: College Completion and Attainment Dr. Kevin Reilly & Dr. Sheila Stearns AGB Consultants December 7th, 2015.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
2008 Spring Semester Workshop AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP T. Gilmour Reeve, Ph.D. Director of Strategic Planning.
Columbia Basin College Plenary I: Mission and Mission Fulfillment Rich Cummins Melissa McBurney 1.
JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT PLAN/REPORT By: Dr. Shemeka McClung Director Ms. Arnitra Hunter Research Associate Institutional Research.
Instructional Leadership Planning with Indicators of Quality Instruction.
Pulaski Technical College Accreditation Overview November 19,
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
Evaluating Our Assessment Program Spring 2004 What is assessment? Assessment is the ongoing process of understanding and improving student learning.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District Accreditation Team Chair Training October 20, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
AQIP Timelines, Processes, and Action Projects Strategic Planning Team Presentation February 15, 2006.
Preparing for the Future Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006.
HLC Criterion Five Primer Thursday, Nov. 5, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Nevada Department of Education Office of Educational Opportunity Nevada Comprehensive Curriculum Audit Tool for Schools NCCAT-S August
Presented by: Carmen D’Agostino and Dan Gutwein CPOD “If you don’t set goals, you can’t regret not reaching them.” Yogi Berra.
Cal Poly Pomona University Strategic Plan 2011 ‐ 2015 Partial Assessment of Progress Presented to the University Strategic Planning Committee (USPC) 12/4/2014.
Selection Criteria and Invitational Priorities School Leadership Program U.S. Department of Education 2005.
Standard Two Les Steele Executive Vice President.
AQIP Categories Category One: Helping Students Learn focuses on the design, deployment, and effectiveness of teaching-learning processes (and on the processes.
Erik Shearer, Professor of Art, Accreditation Faculty Co-chair
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
Instructional Leadership for a Professional Learning Culture:
American University of Beirut
Sam Houston State University
AQIP Accreditation Systems Appraisal 2010
February 21-22, 2018.
Sam Houston State University
Fort Valley State University
Presentation transcript:

The AQIP Steering Committee (ASC): Mr. Don Aungst, CFO Mr. Don Aungst Dr. Dave Chown, CAO Dr. Dave Chown Dr. Scott Figdore, Professor of Science Dr. Scott Figdore Dr. DeWayne Frazier, SVP International Programs Dr. DeWayne Frazier Dr. Linda Haines, Assoc VP Academic Extension Dr. Linda Haines Dr. Doug McReynolds, Bissell Prof of English Dr. Doug McReynolds Dr. Mari Molseed, Professor of Sociology Dr. Mari Molseed Dr. Rich Patrick, Dean of Faculty Dr. Rich Patrick Ms. Deena Serra, Administrative Assistant Ms. Deena Serra

Systems Appraisal via AQIP Strategy Forum Strategy Forum - focused on developing and fine- tuning processes for continuous organizational learning. UIU submitted Systems Portfolio to HLC/AQIP AQIP reviewers provided Systems Appraisal Feedback Report – Strengths and opportunities for improvement were identified – AQIP Steering Committee has homework to complete with your help

Strategy Forum Homework 1.Update Organizational Overview Does the first 10 pages of UIU’s Systems Portfolio still accurately describe the institution? 2.Prepare “Reflections for Action on Continuous Improvement” Summarize five truths/lessons/principles/myths on “lessons learned” since joining AQIP. 3.Complete a Category Improvement Worksheet Identify the AQIP category that is currently the highest priority for improvement. (UIU – Category One) 4.Create a handout describing UIU’s quality effort Provide a summary of institutional involvement and evidence of same.

Strategy Forum Team Mr. Bob Firth – Board Chair Dr. Alan Walker - President Mr. Don Aungst - CFO Dr. Dave Chown - CAO Dr. Rich Patrick – Dean of Faculty Dr. Linda Haines – Assoc VP for AE Dr. DeWayne Frazier – Senior VP IP Dr. Scott Figdore – Professor of Science Dr. Mari Molseed - Alternate

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes Processes 2P6. How do you incorporate information on faculty and staff needs in readjusting these objectives or the process that support them? UIU recognizes the need for a more formal process for incorporating information regarding faculty and staff needs in the readjusting of distinctive objectives and processes to support them.

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes Results 2R1. What measures of accomplishing your major non- instructional objectives and activities do you collect and analyze regularly? 2R2. What are your performance results in accomplishing your other distinctive objectives? Data collection related to distinctive objectives appears qualitative, incidental, and limited to the Fayette location. A formal procedure to measure and analyze performance related to distinctive objectives will provide objective data of the positive effects on student learning and student success. UIU recognizes the need for a more formal process for incorporating information regarding faculty and staff needs in the readjusting of distinctive objectives and processes to support them.

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes Improvements 2I2. How do your culture and infrastructure help you to select specific processes to improve and to set targets for improved performance results in Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives? Insufficient evidence is provided of institution-wide or department-level processes for resource planning or measurement and assessment of non-instructional programs. Without clear processes to measure non- instructional objectives, it will remain a challenge to identify targets for improvement.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations Results 6R1. What measures of student, administrative, and organizational support service processes do you collect and analyze regularly? UIU reports the collection of data for various student, administrative and institutional sectors; however, it is not clear what type of data are being collected nor is it clear how analysis of the data leads to continuous improvements throughout the institution and its multiple locations. With limited data it may be difficult for UIU to accurately allocate resources and improve processes that will better enable the institution to achieve its mission, improve the quality of education and services and respond to future opportunities and challenges at its 18 locations.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations Results 6R2. What are your performance results for student support service processes? Although UIU reports recent changes in student support services it is not clear that data-driven processes are used to inform these changes. Without a data-driven process such as Plan-Do-Check-Act, it is difficult to determine if UIUs current approaches and associated changes will enhance and improve student support services. Additionally it is not clear that UIU utilizes comparative data among its multiple locations in informing performance results.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations Results 6R3. What are your performance results for administrative support services processes? 6R4. How do your key student, administrative, and organizational support areas use information and results to improve their services? Performance results associated with administrative support and institutional support are lacking, limited quantitative data has been made available for review. Additionally, it is not clear what data is being used to inform changes to these services as benchmark and comparative data are not presented. Without a data-driven process such as Plan-Do- Check-Act, it is difficult to determine if UIUs current approaches and associated changes will enhance and improve key support processes.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations Results 6R5. How do your results for the performance of your processes for Supporting Organizational Operations compare with the performance results of other higher education organizations and, if appropriate, of organizations outside of higher education? Although UIU established a benchmark committee in 2007 there is no reportable information at this time. Benchmarking results help provide evidence of an organization’s comparative advantage and assists in the development of goals and objectives designed to address future challenges and opportunities.