2. A College Tale Or... The story of how one college survived the SACS-un invasion

3. Once upon a time in a land not so far away, a small college stood amidst peanut fields and cow pastures.

4. The SACS-uns demanded that the college meet their requirements for accreditation or cease enrolling students.

5. Fortunately, the efforts of the inhabitants succeeded in satisfying the SACS-uns, and the invaders returned to their lair, leaving the inhabitants free to continue enrolling students in their exemplary educational programs.

6. Ten years passed, and, lo, the governing body once again appeared on the horizon. The SACS-uns sent a courier with the message that their demands had changed and that the process for meeting those demands would differ from that of olden days.

7. ... The college embarked on the quest to comply with the requirements of the governing body. And, thus, our tale begins....

8. SACS Re-affirmation Process An Overview

9. LEADERSHIP TEAM Sue Baum Tammy Bunyan Jean Bynum Betty Cully Leslie Gibson Scott Smith Susan Steck Sam Covington Wanda Flowers Kathy Haynes Judy Snyder Judy Miller Linda Gordon Stafford Thompson

10. LEADERSHIP TEAM Oversees the Compliance Certification process Provides leadership, organization, and inspiration in developing the Quality Enhancement Plan

11. Key Elements of SACS Review The Principles of Accreditation (2 major components) The Compliance Certification The Quality Enhancement Plan

12. Compliance Certification: The Principles of Accreditation Comprehensive Standards –12 general statements that focus on outcomes; – a broad review of the institution; –not intended to be redundant.

13. Compliance Certification (cont’d.) Core Requirements - focus on institutional processes for accomplishing outcomes –Institutional Mission, Governance, and Effectiveness –Programs ( Educational Programs, Faculty, Library, Student Affairs and Services) –Resources (Financial and Physical Resources) –Federal Mandates (Title IV Funds)

14. Compliance Certification (cont’d.) The institution’s response to the Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards Indicates compliance, non- compliance, or conditional compliance Accompanied by documents to verify compliance

15. The Quality Enhancement Plan Developed as a course of action for improvement in student learning and achievement Based on a thorough analysis of the effectiveness of the learning environment

16. Quality Enhancement Plan Does not exceed 75 pages of narrative Intended to be an outgrowth of the institution’s planning and evaluation process Supplements the institution’s planning and evaluation process

17. The Peer Review Process College prepares and submits Compliance Certification Off-Site Review Committee reviews the report and advises On-Site Committee regarding compliance issues

18. The Peer Review Process College prepares and submits its QEP The On-Site Committee visits the college to review progress on QEP and address compliance issues

19. Overview of Team Visit Previous vs. Proposed Size of Team : 11-15 Length of Stay: 4 days Opening reception and dinner Focus of Team: Comprehensive Review of accreditation requirements Size of Team: 5 - 7 Length of Stay: 3 days No opening reception or dinner Focus of Team: Quality Enhancement Plan; other issues as adv. by off-site team

20. Overview of Team Visit Previous vs. Proposed Individual interviews days 2 and 3 of visit Team delivers exit report to President on day 4 of visit Chair edits team report Selected group interviews day 2 only Committee Chair delivers exit report to President on day 3 Chair assembles team’s assessment of compliance and QEP

21. Pilot Institutions October 2000, eight institutions began process under proposed guidelines Representative of all types of institutions: private and public, 2-year and 4-year Submitted Compliance Certification in September 2001 Quality Enhancement Plan in January 2002 Visit Feb. - April 2002

22. Timeline (Unofficial) September 2002 - Commission on Colleges notifies institution of reaffirmation visit in 2004; provides dates for submission of reports September 2003 - Compliance Certification due to COC

23. Timeline (cont’d.) September 2003 - Off-site team reviews Compliance Certification January 2004 - Quality Enhancement Plan due to COC February - April 2004 On-site team visits institution September 2004 - Institutional response to on-site visit due to COC

24. Timeline (cont’d.) November-December 2004 COC review to determine reaffirmation January 2005 - Continued monitoring of QEP

25. SACS Annual Meeting 7 - 10 December 2002 San Antonio, Texas Focus on changes in process as recommended following pilot program Final word on reporting process

26. For more information, visit www.sacscoc.org

27. ... And the saga continues Watch for the best-selling sequel, “The Quality Enhancement Plan”