1. What’s New in SACS Reaffirmation Ephraim Schechter September 23, 2004 Western Carolina University

2. SACS/COC New Process, New Criteria Piloted 2002, implemented 2004 Less prescriptive, more flexible Compliance and Quality Enhancement Plan

3. Compliance Still emphasizes outcomes assessment Less prescriptive / more flexible than previous Criteria –Flexible  ambiguous Includes “acceptable QEP” May submit electronically Off-site review to flag compliance problems On-site review of remaining issues

4. Compliance Still emphasizes outcomes assessment –of student learning –of administrative and service activities Less prescriptive / more flexible than previous Criteria –From 460 Criteria/”Must” statements to 73 Requirements & Standards Eliminated redundancy Generalized, reduced detail and “must”

5. Compliance Flexible  ambiguous E.g.: Institutional Effectiveness –Previous 3 pages, 12 “must” statements (Criteria 3.1, 3.2, 3.3) –Current 2 paragraphs (Core Requirement 2.5, Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1)

6. Compliance Includes “acceptable QEP” –Core Requirement 2.12: The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan and demonstrates that the plan is part of an ongoing planning and evaluation process. May submit electronically –Electronic or hardcopy –Internet &/or self-contained CD

7. Compliance Off-site review to flag compliance problems –Off-site team reviews multiple institutions On-site review of remaining issues

8. Quality Enhancement Plan The QEP –is for institutional improvement –must address student learning –in one or more “critical issue” topics chosen by the institution On-site review 5 th -year follow-up

9. Quality Enhancement Plan SACS wants –A forward-looking action plan on issue(s) related to enhancing student learning –Related to but not replacing planning & evaluation processes –Clear assessment of impact and progress –For the good of the institution, not “just for SACS” –Broad involvement, institutional commitment (from SACS/COC Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation pp. 21-27)

10. Quality Enhancement Plan The QEP should demonstrate: –Focus: clear conception, importance for improving quality of student learning –Institutional capability: evidence of resources/commitment to implement, sustain, and complete the plan –Assessment: process to evaluate the plan & achievement of goals/outcomes, especially re student learning –Broad-based development involving all aspects of campus community (from SACS/COC Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation On-site Review Guidelines pp. 27-28)

11. Quality Enhancement Plan On-site review –Team with expertise in QEP area(s) (and remaining compliance areas) For your institution, your QEP You recommend 1-2 members 5th-year Impact Report to SACS –Effects on student learning outcomes? –Changes? Why? –Unanticipated outcomes?

12. Quality Enhancement Plan Developing a QEP –Approaches vary – examples at this workshop include LSU: from ongoing strategic planning process NC State: small planning group develops potential topics; key campus groups winnow; executive officers select; campus committees & forums sharpen Austin Peay: campus input from leadership retreat, faculty senate meeting(s), fall convocation, etc.

13. Reaffirmation Timeline SACS/COC Timeline (in your handout packet)

14. Resources Principles of Accreditation: Foundation for Quality Enhancement (SACS, 2004) http://www.sacscoc.org/principles.asp Handbook for Reaffirmation of Accreditation (SACS/COC, 2003) Handbook for Review Committees (SACS/COC, 2003) SACS/COC Policies http://www.sacscoc.org/commpub1.asp

15. Ephraim I. Schechter, Ph.D. University Planning & Analysis North Carolina State University 919 / 515-2776 eischech@unity.ncsu.edu