2 nd Presentation to the School of Library and Information Science (SLIS) Community on Accreditation Planning Dr. Kimberly B. Kelley Dean, SLIS September 25, 2008

Topics for This Evening’s Forum  Status of SLIS progress on achieving compliance with the American Library Association (ALA) Standards  Status on the ALA Program Presentation  Next steps to achieve accreditation in March, 2009  Q&A

3 Some Terminology  Committee on Accreditation  Office of Accreditation, American Library Association (ALA)  The Program Presentation  The Evaluation Review Panel (ERP)  The Evaluation Review Report  Conditional Accreditation is “a status assigned to a program that must make changes to comply with the 1992 Standards for Accreditation of Master’s Programs in Library and Information Studies to enable accreditation beyond the date specified by the Committee on Accreditation (COA). Please note that these programs are fully accredited under the Standards.” (verbatim, ALA Web site): es) es)

4 ALA Standards (there are six)  Standard I: Mission, goals and objectives  Standard II: Curriculum  Standard III: Faculty  Standard IV: Students  Standard V: Administration and Financial Support  Standard VI: Physical Resources and Facilities

5 Mandatory Improvement Areas for SLIS:  Standard I: Mission, Goals and Objectives  Standard II: Curriculum  Standard III: Faculty  Standard VI: Physical Resources and Facilities

ALA Concerns for Standard I: Mission, Goals and Objectives  Rewrite the mission, goals and objectives to “form the essential frame of reference for evaluation” of the entire program,  Give special attention to writing program objectives “in terms of educational results to be achieved” and,  Include the School’s constituencies in all planning activities.

Progress on Standard I:  SLIS continues comprehensive planning including: Developed new values, vision, mission, and goals and objectives for the master’s program Developed a SLIS Working Plan for longer-term planning in CUA-SLIS (three year plan) Regular feedback/collaboration with the SLIS Advisory Committee Accreditation Web page to share progress/gain feedback from constituents ( Student, Alumni, and Employer surveys completed to ensure comprehensive stakeholder feedback and, Developed a technology strategic plan.

ALA-COA Concerns Standard II: Curriculum  The School must develop a “curriculum…based on goals and objectives” that “evolves in response to a systematic planning process”,  Ensure that the School “responds to the needs of a rapidly changing technological and global society”,  “Construct coherent programs of study”,  Strengthen the technical component of the program and,  Include the School’s constituencies in all planning activities.

Progress on Standard II:  Re-established Curriculum Committee for the School  Reviewing four core courses course objectives and content areas.  Reviewing core courses to ensure appropriate technologies are covered.  Reviewing/refreshing/revising SLIS “tracks” and concentrations  Reactivated the Technology Committee for the School.  Technology enhancements to ensure curriculum is “responsive”  Implemented new technology enhancements in Marist  Reviewing and updating advising procedures/materials/process  Systematic plan to include all constituencies in curriculum changes/updates

ALA-COA Concerns Standard III: Faculty  Assure the Committee that the faculty are “sufficient in number and in diversity to carry out the major share of the teaching, research and service activities required for a program wherever and however it is delivered.”  Allay the concern of the Committee that the faculty does not have the experience to “demonstrate skill in academic planning and evaluation.”  Include the School’s constituencies in all planning activities.

Progress on Standard III:  Four new faculty hired  Increased expertise in technology planning  Two more faculty are being recruited  Hiring is also to address the COA expressed concern related to “diversity” and “number”

Progress on Standard III: Faculty  Upgrading technology infrastructure for SLIS ($93K infusion of support from CUA)  Faculty support with the university’s IT operation  Hired two support personnel for off-site locations to support SLIS faculty (LoC and VA)

Standard IV: Students and Standard V: Administration and Financial Support  COA did not express concerns with these two standards.  Program Presentation will continue to meet the COA standards.

ALA-COA Concerns Standard VI: Facilities  The School must demonstrate that the physical facilities “provide a functional environment for students and faculty”,  The School must explain more clearly why it is non-ADA compliant,  The School must demonstrate how the Information Commons contributes to the technical knowledge of the students,  The School must include its constituencies in all planning activities.

Progress on Standard VI: Facilities  Upgrades to Marist Hall Classrooms Information Commons Computer Lab  Technology Committee’s strategic planning process  Marist fully wireless

Progress on Standard VI:  Marist is not fully ADA compliant. Cost- prohibitive to upgrade the building  Therefore: Classes held in other, ADA compliant buildings  Information Commons and the first floor of Marist Hall Classrooms are ADA compliant  Strong movement to alternative formats to lessen reliance on Marist Hall Examining other facilities for SLIS (longer term) School facilities committee

Next Steps  Finish curricular review of the four core courses  Continue to make strategic upgrades for technology infrastructure  Finish the Program Presentation draft due in November, 2008 to COA  Prepare for visit by the Evaluation Review Panel (ERP) March 23/24, 2009  To keep apprised: Visit SLIS Accreditation Web site: Read updates in the Dean’s Dialogue (blog):

Questions? Thank you