Preparing for the Future Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

UCSC History. UCSC: A brief history 60s University Placement Committee A lot of field trips/interaction with employers.

Advertisements

Cedarville University Accreditation Self-Study Plan Presented by Dr. Thomas Mach.

UMR’s Accreditation Self-Study. The Value of Accreditation  Institutional Reputation  Standard of Quality  Vehicle for Self Improvement  Transferability.

Presenters: Lisa McLaughlin, Institutional Data Coordinator Best Practices: Program Review TCUs Chief Academic Officers Annual Meeting.

New England Association for Schools and Colleges Re-Accreditation for Brandeis University Marty Wyngaarden Krauss Provost and Senior Vice President for.

Assessment Plans Discussion Career Services Julie Guevara, Accreditation & Assessment Officer February 6, 2006.

Selected Items from a Report of the Higher Learning Commission Comprehensive Evaluation Visit to OSU Pam Bowers Director, University Assessment & Testing.

Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools Continuing Accreditation 2005 Self-Study and Site Visit.

1 UCSC Computer Engineering Objectives, Outcomes, & Feedback Tracy Larrabee Joel Ferguson Richard Hughey.

1 GETTING STARTED WITH ASSESSMENT Barbara Pennipede Associate Director of Assessment Office of Planning, Assessment and Research Office of Planning, Assessment.

Assessment Plans Discussion CLAS Unit Heads Maria Cimitile, Associate Dean, CLAS Julie Guevara, Accreditation & Assessment Officer January 11, 2006.

Why Institutional Assessment is Important for Middle States Adapted (with permission) From Andrea Lex, Who Presented at Stockton September 20, 2010 Facilitated.

Retention Interview Process Training July 2008 Retention Interview Process Training 1.

STRATEGIC PLANNING STATUS AND DIRECTION Report to the PPPC September 16, 2013 Michael Berman VP for Technology & Communication.

THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES The Higher Learning Commission.

 The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is a voluntary, non-governmental, membership association that is dedicated to quality assurance and.

CRITERION 2: PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE. CORE COMPONENT 2a: The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic.

Msubillings.edu/futureu PROVOST FORUM October 15, 2012 msubillings.edu/futureu.

Maureen Noonan Bischof Eden Inoway-Ronnie Office of the Provost Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association Annual Meeting April 22, 2007.

Session Goals: To redefine assessment as it relates to our University mission. To visit assessment plan/report templates and ensure understanding for.

Departmental Assessment Process.  The institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides.

Periodic Program Review for Academics Affirming Excellence in Education LaMont Rouse Executive Director of Assessment, Accreditation & Compliance.

Engaging the Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky Working Together to Prepare Quality Educators.

Continuing Accreditation The Higher Learning Commission provides institutional accreditation through the evaluation of the entire university organization.

Incorporating Student Engagement into the Accreditation Process April 11, 2010.

By Elizabeth Meade Our Reaccreditation through Middle States Commission on Higher Education Presentation to the Board of Trustees, May 11, 2012.

Mission and Mission Fulfillment Tom Miller University of Alaska Anchorage.

Timeline Fall 2005: –Gather existing data –Gather input from university community –Gather input from constituents/off-campus community Spring and Summer.

Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) Reaffirmation of Accreditation.

University-wide Accreditation Academic Leadership Program February 18, 2010.

MIDDLE STATES COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION: REACCREDITATION D ECENNIAL S ELF -S TUDY P ROCESS A CADEMIC S ENATE S EPTEMBER 17, 2015 Anne Wahl Michael.

STUDENT SERVICES REVIEW January 8, Context – Administrative Unit Reviews Objectives Roles Unit Self-Study Internal Review Committee External Reviewers.

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.

SMSU University Mission Southwest Minnesota State University prepares students to meet the complex challenges of this century as engaged citizens in their.

NEASC FIVE YEAR REPORT FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE JANUARY 2007.

1 SCU’s WASC Reaccreditation Diane Jonte-Pace, Self Study Steering Committee Chair Don Dodson, Academic Liaison Officer Winter 2007.

CCC: Where Teaching and Learning Transform Lives, Putting Together the Self- Study Puzzle Corning Community College August 24, 2012.

Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.

The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment

PRESIDENT’S Campus forum November 9, Dr. Shirley Wagner and Dr. Paul Weizer NEASC Self Study Co-Chairs Key Elements of the Self Study Process Demystifying.

Middle States Reaccreditation Process at The Catholic University of America.

Yes, It’s Time!  10 years after the most recent visit ( )  (probably spring semester)  SMSU proposes dates; HLC replies  Much to be.

STRATEGIC PLANNING & WASC UPDATE Tom Bennett Presentation to Academic Senate February 1, 2006.

Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.

CAMPUS AND COMMUNITY OPEN SESSION MARCH 25 Higher Learning Commission Re-accreditation.

Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.

CREATING A CULTURE OF EVIDENCE Student Affairs Assessment Council October 2013 Dr. Barbara Copenhaver-Bailey Assistant Vice President for Student Success.

HLC Criterion Five Primer Thursday, Nov. 5, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.

DEEP DIVING INTO THE REVISED MSCHE STANDARDS FOR RE-ACCREDITATION Brigitte Valesey, Ph.D. Widener University Drexel Assessment Conference September.

UW-Platteville Vision UW-Platteville will be recognized as the leading student-focused university for its success in achieving excellence, creating opportunities,

3A – The organization’s goals for student learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible 3B --

Planning with the Five Criteria Ozarka College This PowerPoint was made in 2008 and slightly updated in August It explains the current yearly planning.

December 9, 2010 Laura A. Bayless, PhD Dean of Students St. Mary’s College of Maryland.

Strategic Plan: Goals, Objectives & Success Measures Administrative Forum, South Campus June 17,

Annual Program Assessment With a Five- Year Peer Review John Henik Associate Vice President, Academic Affairs Dave Horsfield

1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.

Academic Program Review Workshop 2017

Assessment Strategies for Student Affairs

Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015

University Career Services Committee

Presenters: Lisa McLaughlin, Institutional Data Coordinator

Department of Political Science & Sociology North South University

NICC Self-Study The Road to Excellence

HLC/Strategic Planning Update Professional Development and Assessment Day August 15, 2017.

Pathways 2017: HLC Accreditation Overview

Middle States Accreditation Standards and Processes

Reaccreditation and Illinois

AQIP Accreditation Systems Appraisal 2010

Presentation transcript:

Preparing for the Future Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Our Goals Today 1. Describe our purpose and procedures 2. Provide a glimpse of our work on our criterion 3. Get your input—we still have work to do and want to be sure we’re not missing something

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Reaccreditation Process Higher Learning Commission Why? Campus Self-Study Five criteria 200 page document by Dec Accreditation Team Visit: March 5-7, 2007

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Criterion 2 Preparing for the Future: The organization’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its education, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Core Components 2a. The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic trends. 2b. The organization’s resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future. 2c. The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement. 2d. All levels of planning align with the organization’s mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Our Charge Gather data and information related to planning, budgeting, and evaluation Interpret data and information Evaluate how our planning and budgeting processes are used to focus our resources toward future challenges and areas of need

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Committee Members Tim Borchers, Associate Dean Arts and Sciences Kathleen Enz Finken, Dean of Arts and Humanities Les Bakke, Director of Information Technology Jane Bergland, Nursing Steven Bolduc, Economics Tracy Clark, Social Work and TOCAR David Crockett, Administrative VP and Dean of Business and Industry Jan Flack, Director of Continuing Studies Kayla George, Student Jean Hollaar, Budget and Planning Officer Patrick Hundley, Executive Vice President of the Alumni Foundation Valerie Mikelson, Student Gina Monson, Director of Admissions Cliff Schuette, Counseling and Career Placement Scott Seltveit, Technology Pam Werre, Library

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Our Procedures Have met twice per month this academic year Brainstormed and looked at existing data/information Worked through each core component Drafted a chapter Working on fleshing out/revising

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 What We Have Discussed Coordination among various levels of planning (2D) Future concerns at MSUM such as recruitment, retention, diversity, technology, changing student expectations (Example: 2AC) Resources (technology to financial to human) and our plans for enhancing them in the future (Example: 2BF) Strategies for evaluating our campus and making improvements—closing the loop (Example: 2DB) Work plan initiatives have been useful to focus budgets on strategic priorities

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Feedback? What might we have missed? What comes to your mind when you think about preparing for the future? What should be emphasized in the chapter? What is your impression of planning and budgeting on campus? Other comments or questions?

Our Time to Shine Criterion 2 Open Forum March 30, 2006 Contact Us