What CIOs Need to Know

 Meridith Randall – ACCJC ALO for 17 years for 3 different colleges; never had a college receive a sanction; has written multiple self- evaluations, midterm reports, and FU reports; has served on 4 teams, most recently Oct  Mary Kay Rudolph --

 Preparing for the External Team ◦ Ideally, teams are trained a few weeks ahead of the visit -- in reality, some team members may be added late to replace others ◦ Most teams have a couple of CEOs, a CIO, student services personnel, and should have faculty (but may not)

 Materials used to train/Team Members ◦ Handouts ◦ Team members must draft a great deal of the report based on the self-evaluation ◦ Recently, the first meeting is on Monday, then interviews begin immediately ◦ Depending on the team, interviews may or may not be coordinated ◦ Team members may or may not follow guidelines of professionalism

 A comfortable room with hard evidence  Evidence at the hotel  The ability to change interviews frequently  Tech support on call  Decent food  Endless caffeine What is an unreasonable expectation from a team?

 Anything you identified in your self- evaluation as a problem  Anything currently on ACCJC’s radar  Any particular interests of the team member  The Rubrics

 Mission Statement (IA) ◦ Some elements to consider:  Are intended students identified?  Are learning outcomes mentioned or implied?  Was development of mission statement inclusive?  How is effectiveness assessed?  What is cycle to review mission statement? Is it followed? Is the review process inclusive?  Can you demonstrate that the mission statement is central to college planning?  How is it communicated?

 Don’t claim you review it regularly if you don’t  The proposed standards put more emphasis on using data to prove the college accomplishes its mission  Usually reviewed by CEOs on team

 Key elements: ◦ Dialogue about student learning and processes  What hard evidence do you have?  What results have come from dialogue?  What will your colleagues tell the team?

 Measurable goals ◦ What was the process to set college goals? ◦ Was it inclusive? Will staff say it was? ◦ Where and how are they used in planning, resource allocation, etc.? ◦ What data is used to show progress toward goals? Planning process Is there broad involvement? Are resources allocated consistent with goals? Have the results of resource allocation been measured?

 IIA. Instructional Programs ◦ While this is the heart of what we do at the college, most colleges do not get into trouble for Standard II, with a couple of exceptions:  SLO assessment and comparable support for online students  Allocation of resources to support instruction, library, etc.

 Must have some kind of program review/vitality assessment process  Must assess student learning needs to inform programs  Must determine if students meet learning outcomes at all levels, and use results for improvement

 Must use “delivery systems” that meet student needs and assess their effectiveness  Must have a process to determine what is offered as credit, community ed, pre- collegiate, etc.  Must have active advisory committees for CTE programs

 General education should include all components listed in the standard and GELOs should exist and be assessed  Must have program elimination process  Must publicize student learning assessment results

 Syllabi must include course SLOs  Clock to credit hour standards  Emphasis on scheduling in a manner that facilitates student completion  Student Support and Library and Learning Support Services are one section

 Difficult to be sanctioned based on this section  Essentially, there is a process to determine support needs and to assess their effectiveness (often through SAOs), including placement, advising, and online services  In new standards, catalog requirements are listed in a separate section

 Need to have sufficient library, computer lab, tutoring and other services as evidenced by regular assessment  Must have “comparable services” online and at off-site locations, plus adequate access  Must address information competency and assess the students

 IIC is folded into IIB  May or may not indicate a de-emphasis on libraries and learning centers  May reflect difficulty in finding librarians to serve on teams  CCL has protested the change

 Technically, not under the CIO area and CIOs would rarely be assigned to this standard  Human Resources: should make sure faculty hiring follows a process and all faculty meet MQs  As CIO, responsible for regular evaluation of all faculty

 Current standard: “Faculty…have, as a component of their evaluation, effectiveness in producing…learning outcomes.”  What are the ways to address this?  New standards: “The evaluation of faculty, academic administrators, and others….includes, as a component…consideration of the effectiveness of producing [student learning].”

 Must have a “sufficient number of qualified faculty” – will your faculty agree?  Must have a process to identify and deliver appropriate professional development for faculty, and evaluate what is provided  Must show impact of professional development

 Physical and Technology Resources: How are needs identified, funded and evaluated? How are allocations connected to college goals and student learning needs?  Is technology sufficient for identified student needs?  Contractual agreements, particularly with non-accredited entities

 DE Policy  Transfer of Credit  Contractual Relationships  ERs: Are often cited in sanctions

 Whatever your process is for planning, assessing SLOs, resource allocation, etc., make sure you can produce DOCUMENTS and show that the process is evaluated regularly and results in changes.  Make sure (almost) everyone can tell the team what the processes are AND that they had opportunity for input. Keep evidence that employees were given chances to comment.

 If you come through a visit with sanctions, it will likely be your fault as the ALO…..  But if you are successful, there will be “too many people to thank”  Just accept it….