1. Agency on the Move ACCJC Update
CIO Conference
April 17, 2019
Dr. Stephanie Droker, Senior Vice President
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges

2. Welcome and Introductions
Who is in the room?
Be prepared to share your thoughts:
What do you hope to gain from this discussion?
What questions do you regarding accreditation or the self-evaluation process?

3. ACCJC 101 What is the ACCJC? Regional Accreditor (1 of 7)
1 Region, 2 Agencies
Why do we exist?
Gatekeepers to Federal Financial Aid
Quality Assurance Based on Peer Review
Dual Purpose: Compliance and Improvement

4. Philosophy of Accreditation and Commitment to Peer Review
Acknowledged as the most appropriate and desirable approach to evaluate the complex environment of higher education Serves as a rich and diverse resource for quality improvement for colleges
A process that uses academic inquiry to inform practices of institutions for quality improvement, based on evidence
The results are used to further articulate the meaning of such practices within the higher education context and allow for the evolution of policies and practices Is frequently at odds with governmental-directed evaluation which often relies on standardization of expectations and quantitative analyses that cannot capture the nuances of complex phenomena, such as student achievement

5. Regional Accreditors

7. Recent Good News
US Department of Education staff recommendation to NACIQI:
Renew ACCJC’s recognition for five years
Issues and Problems: None
Approve expansion of scope: ACCJC can approve credentials “not to exceed the bachelor’s degree” (i.e. no limit on the number of bachelor’s degrees ACCJC can approve)
Written 3rd Party Comments: All supportive of the agency.
Will be considered by NACIQI at its July session; then formal letter

8. Recent Changes Comprehensive Review Midterm Report
VP Portfolio Model
ISER Training
Advanced ISER Training
Condensed ISER
Midterm Report
QFE vs. Improvement Plans
Fall 2020 Changes
Annual Report and Annual Fiscal Report

9. ACCJC Frequency of Sanctions

10. Overview of Sub Change Purpose Inquiry Form Process 34 CFR §602.22
Change in mission, objectives, scope or name of institution
Change in the nature of the constituency served
Change in the location or geographic area served
Change in the control or legal status of the institution
Change is courses or programs or their mode of delivery
Change is credit awarded
Implementation of direct assessment
Contractual relationship with a non-regionally accredited organization
Any other significant change
Inquiry Form
Process

11. Innovation – Formative/Summative Model
A “Formative/Summative” model for comprehensive reviews
The college’s self-study is submitted to the review team a semester prior to the site visit for the Team ISER Review (TIR)
During the TIR, peer review team conducts a formative evaluation:
Verifies compliance with many operational aspects, taking them “off the table” as not requiring onsite verification
Specifies areas where additional information is needed, or where the institution needs to further develop its processes, in anticipation of the site visit a semester later
Identifies focused “Core Inquiries” that will be pursued during the on-site visit
A smaller team (and/or a shorter visit schedule) conducts the Focused Site Visit, with the team report leading to summative findings
Endorsed in concept by the Commission January 2019; 3 single-institution pilots, then a district; Advisory Committee to guide development of details

12. Visual Representation of the Process

13. F/S Pilot Phase Timeline
February 2019
1st Phase Pilot Colleges – ISER Training (Spring 2021 Team ISER Review, Fall Focused Site Visit
Commission Action – January 2022
October 2019
2nd Phase Pilot District – ISER Training (Fall 2021 Team ISER Review, Spring Focused Site Visit
Commission Action – June 2022
Full Implementation – 2022

14. Updates from the National Scene
Negotiated rulemaking (NEG REG)
Required to bring relevant stakeholders together to discuss potential changes to rules and policies
Higher education and accreditation is taking center stage this year
What is being negotiated?
Transfer of credit among institutions
Permitting accrediting organizations to waive certain criteria for institutions to encourage innovation
Limiting number of states that regional accreditors could operate
Establishing a definition of “regular and substantive interactions” in DE
Protecting religious mission at faith-based institutions
Transparency of the accreditation process, including making all accreditation reports public

15. Questions? Comments? sdroker@accjc.org