1. COUNCIL FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF STANDARDS (CAS), cas.edu
AHEAD Representatives – Ann Knettler-Smith & Jean Ashmore

2. Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education
Founded in 1979
Consortium of 43 member organizations
CAS Board of Directors comprised of representatives from member associations
Consensus-oriented, collaborative approach
45 standards and self-assessment guides (SAGs)
Disability Resources & Services 2013
Standards are designed to be achievable by any program or service, at any institution type
For more than 35 years, the Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS) has promoted inter-departmental, inter-program collaboration and reflected good practices generally agreed upon by the student affairs -profession-at-large.
CAS emerged from a movement on the part of several national associations to develop accreditation standards for academic preparation programs for counselors and counselor educators and for student affairs administrators and educators. CACREP (Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs) was established in 1980 to address preparation standards for counselor education programs; and ACPA took the lead on creating a set of preparation standards for master’s level college student affairs programs. ACPA invited other interested associations to join this effort, and it resulted in the creation CAS – “an inter-association consortium for purposes of developing and promulgating professional standards to guide both student affairs practice and academic preparation of those who administer student support programs and services” (CAS, 2).
CAS has adopted a consensus-based decision-making model for reviewing and revising standards of professional practice. Working toward consensus requires dialogue and compromise; the rewards are shared understanding, unanimous agreement, and standards applicable across different contexts. By seeking consensus around each set of CAS standards, collective expertise emerges above individual experiences and perspectives.
CAS has developed and promulgated standards for quality enhancement of higher education programs and services through self assessment.

3. Principles Underlying All CAS Standards
Students & Their Environments
The whole student is shaped by environments that provide learning opportunities reflective of society and diversity, with students having ultimate responsibility for learning
Diversity & Multiculturalism
Institutions embracing diversity and eliminating barriers with justice and respect for differences, binding individuals to community
Organization, Leadership, & Human Resources
Quality of leaders possessing sound preparation is essential, with success directly correlated to clarity of mission
Health Engendering Environments
Education prospers in benevolent environments that provide students with appropriate challenge and necessary support
Ethical Considerations
Educators exhibit impeccable ethical behavior in professional and personal life
The fundamental principles that undergird the work of CAS and guide its initiatives were derived from the theories and conceptual models implicit within human development, group dynamics, student learning, organizational management, and administration that inform the work of higher education professionals who support students. The guiding principles for CAS can be organized into five broad categories. These principles underlie the work of CAS and the standards the group sets.

4. Twelve Parts of All CAS Standards
Mission
Program
Organization and Leadership
Human Resources
Ethics
Law, Policy and Governance
Diversity, Equity, and Access
Internal and External Relations
Financial Resources
Technology
Facilities and Equipment
Assessment
A number of characteristics are common to all functional areas, and these commonalities demand inclusion in all current and future CAS standards. As a result, General Standards were devised that CAS Board members unanimously agreed were relevant to all the functional areas within student support programs and services championed by CAS member associations.
The General Standards are arranged into 12 sections, which appear in CAS standards and assessment tools to provide direction for different facets of programs/services.
Functional Area standards are in various stages of revision – some committees have just been charged, while others are out for expert review
A note about the General Standards: They are revised every 3 years to maintain relevancy and currency in the field.

5. CAS Learning and Development Outcomes
While the CAS Learning and Development Outcomes represent one element of Part 2: Program in all CAS standards, they are an essential part of a well-functioning program or service and so are a focus of this presentation.

6. Learning and Development Outcome Domains and Dimensions
Six Student Learning & Development Outcome Domains are a part of the CAS General Standards
Stated expectation in the CAS General Standards that all functional area programs must place emphasis on identifying relevant learning outcomes and assessing their achievement by students
Outcomes are classically understood to be changes that occur as a result of some aspect of the college experience (Astin, 1991).
Standards serve a purpose in leading towards intentional outcomes
CAS identifies 6 learning outcomes to address the whole student
Each functional area either directly influences, contributes or makes outcome possible
Some outcomes may be more significant to a program/service than others but all should be on radar
Critically important to think first of desired outcomes and then design programs that will get us there
Standards, outcomes, and assessment lead us to accountability.

7. Fundamental Questions of an Assessment
Student Learning and Development Outcomes
Program Evaluation
What is the effect of our work on students?
How are they different as a result of interacting with our programs and services?
How do we know?
How do we demonstrate their learning?
What and how do we measure?
Is the program or service functioning effectively to achieve its mission?
What evidence is available to support the determination?
Learning and development outcomes are part of this evidence
How is evidence used to make program decisions?
Assessing student outcomes and evaluating program outcomes must be approached differently, since the results will answer very different questions about a program/service. Understanding the complimentary roles of student outcomes and program outcomes within a review/self-assessment can help personnel gather appropriate evidence in response to different standards for practice.

8. Conducting Self-Assessment using CAS Standards

9. CAS Evaluation Steps 1. Plan the Process
Map out steps for process, develop timeline, build buy-in with all stakeholders, and explicitly identify desired outcomes of the self-study
4. Conduct and Interpret Ratings using Evaluative Evidence
Clarify team’s rating criteria; employ a process for rating [small group, individual, staff]; negotiate rating differences; and manage group ratings
2. Assemble and Educate Team
3-5 (program) to 8-10 (division) comprised of stakeholders including students; train team on self-assessment concepts & principles
5. Develop an Action Plan
Identify discrepancies, corrective action, and recommended steps (e.g., identify strengths, weaknesses, benchmarks, resources, timeframe)
3. Identify, Collect, and Review Evidence
Define what constitutes evidence; then gather, collect, manage, and review evidence
6. Prepare a Report
Identify audience for report(s); describe self-study, evidence gathering, rating process, evaluations, strengths, weaknesses, and action plan; draft executive summary
7. Close the Loop
Put action plans into practice; navigate politics and secure resources; identify barriers; and build buy-in to the program review results
For each set of standards and guidelines, CAS provides a Self-Assessment Guide (SAG) that includes a recommended comprehensive self-study process for program evaluation. Seven basic steps to using a SAG are suggested for implementing a functional area self-study. The self-study process depicted here is recommended.
Preparing for Self-Assessment
Review the instrument that guides the process – in this case, the CAS Self- Assessment Guide – in order to know what you should expect
What is the purpose and scope of your study?
Who should serve on your self-study team?
In your area, what sources of evaluative evidence are available?
What previous assessment data do you have?

10. Self-Assessment Guides (SAG)
Provides an effective workbook/format for evaluation, self-assessment, and institutional reviews
Translates standards into multiple criterion statements which can be measured
Clusters of criterion measures focus on subsections of the standards, allowing raters to express detailed and targeted judgments
Informs on program strengths and weaknesses
Leads to an action plan to enhance programs and services that benefit student learning and development
CAS functional area standards are used most often by practitioners as a critical component of a comprehensive assessment plan and program evaluation. CAS provides tools and processes to guide practitioners through a self-assessment or program evaluation
The CAS process for conducting a comprehensive self-assessment of programs and services and student outcomes begins with the CAS SAG or Self Assessment Guide. The SAG serves several functions, detailed on this slide.

11. CAS as Part of an Ongoing Planning and Assessment Cycle
CAS Program Review
Year 0-1
Strategic/Program Action Plan
Year 1
Action Plan Enabled
Year 2-5
Data Gathering
Interim Reviews
Prep for Strategic/CAS Program Review
Year 4
If an action plan already is in place, then CAS just becomes part of that process
Maintaining timely, consistent and accurate data is crucial to having good results
As part of a multi-year cycle, conducting a program review/self-study is one part of an ongoing quality improvement process.