1. DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO QA AND THEIR IMPACT ON EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS AND SUSTAINABILITY Ralph A. Wolff President and Executive Director Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities Western Association of Schools & Colleges Western Association of Schools & Colleges

2. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 2 "Tell me and I forget. "Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn." Involve me and I learn." Ben Franklin

3. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 3 Forces Leading to New Approaches New types of institutions Mergers, acquisitions, joint programs, dual degrees, transnational provision New modalities of delivery Heightened expectations of QA agencies Increased emphasis on student learning Global competition Dissatisfaction of premier institutions Economic downturn

4. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 4 A Personal Learning Journey Receipt of grants from two foundations Work with principles of learning organizations Study of British QAA Audit process Participation in Hong Kong TQLPR Involved with 4 Handbook revisions Member of Dubai UQAIB

5. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 5 Opening the Door to Change: The Questions We Asked What do you most want from your accreditation experience? Did you get it? What was the half-life of your last report? Did it lead to real change/improvement/ Who was the report for? WASC or the institution? Were key stakeholders deeply engaged in self review and preparation of the report?

6. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 6 The Answers We Received Reviews need to be value adding – they aren’t The process costs too much Focus on continuous improvement Have high standards that lead and guide Rely more on existing data/evidence Provide external accountability to avoid governmental interference Focus on key issues Address “accreditation fatigue”

7. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 7 Mental Models of Quality Can you identify the top institution in your country in your jurisdiction?

8. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 8 Evolution of QA Goals Meeting institution’s stated goals Meeting external standards Assuring adequate quality systems Assuring effective learning results Benchmarking- comparing results Ranking

9. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 9 Developing and Applying Standards – Striking A Balance Compliance -- -- -- -- -- Improvement Minimum -- -- -- -- -- -- Aspirational Prescriptive -- -- -- -- -- Adaptive Quantitative -- -- -- -- -- Qualitative Inputs -- Processes – - Outcomes Comprehensive -- -- -- - Focused

10. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 10 Reframing the Review Process Single Review -- -- -- -- Multiple Reviews Episodic -- -- -- -- -- -- - Continuous Formative -- -- -- -- -- -- Summative Standards Focused -- --Theme Focused Interview Based -- -- -- Evidence Based Atomistic -- -- -- -- -- -- - Systemic Judgmental -- -- -- -- -- - Developmental

11. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 11 Applying Quality Principles Leadership commitment Responsibility for all students Range of variability Sampling/Audit trails Process mapping Continuous improvement

12. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 12 US Accreditation Reform The shift from an episodic ‘add-on’ to a value-adding process The shift from an episodic ‘add-on’ to a value-adding process The shift from inputs to alignment of processes to learning outcomes The shift from inputs to alignment of processes to learning outcomes A shift from a single comprehensive visit to a variety of new visit processes A shift from a single comprehensive visit to a variety of new visit processes A redefinition of accreditation from a conservator of traditional values to an agent for change

13. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 13 Southern Association (SACS) Significant reduction in the number of standards Off-site compliance review Institutional Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) review (6 months)

14. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 14 Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) Only for institutions in good standing Quality systems centered  Self assessment  Strategy forum  Action projects  Annual external reviews  Systems portfolio/review (4 years)  Institutional review (7 years)

15. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 15 WASC Learning-centered 3 stage review process  Proposal (peer reviewed)  Capacity and Preparatory Review (20-24 months))  Educational Effectiveness Review (18-24 months) Emphasis on student and organizational learning Page limits; reliance on institutional portfolios Evidence centered

16. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 16 Institutional Impact New approaches are having a significant impact Shifting to targeted areas of improvement that will make a real difference Revealing huge “capacity” issues relating to faculty training and institutional data Cited by many as “transformational” Involves more work than ever before and greater value

17. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 17 Where We Are Still Challenged Changing institutional culture to focus on student learning Competing with the rankings/reputational paradigm Shifting from mission-centered to public accountability Deciding what to make public Defining what level of learning is “good enough” Addressing under preparedness of students Improving rates of student completion

18. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 18 Lessons Learned/Implications QA agencies need to define and periodically challenge their own models of quality Revisions to visit processes are as important and impactful as revising standards QA agencies have tremendous intellectual capital that makes us all leaders Focus initially is on capacity; needs to move to effectivness We all need to address what we will do after the second round of reviews under existing models

19. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 19 Stages of QAA Development Formational – defining scope, creating standards, generating consent Operational – implementing, creating support materials, building capacity Developmental – training institutions to meet new expectations Transformational – redefining purposes to serve new needs

20. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 20 Conclusion We have a long way to go and a lot to learn We are competing with budget cuts in many places that shift priorities and focus away from q.a. systems and assessment of learning Institutions continue to build recognition through increased research and selectivity Innovation, experimentation and adaptation works Our QA processes holds great promise to lead the world in defining, evaluating and improving quality

21. Wolff - INQAAHE March 2009 21 Personal Reflections New approaches involve risk Risk-taking requires courage Meaningful change requires persistence and time Consent-building is ongoing Founded on passion for student and organizational learning