1. Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Process Update

2. Overview What is accreditation? Significant changes in the re-accreditation process since 2007 Campus resources

3. What is accreditation? Voluntary process of external review to ensure that institutions provide high-quality education and continuously seek to improve.  Assures the public that UW – Platteville meets clearly communicated criteria and regulations.  Ensures that faculty and students are eligible for federal funding.

4. Who is our accrediting body? The Higher Learning Commission (HLC), a commission of the North Central Association (NCA)  Federally recognized private, non-profit agency regulated by Congress through the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008

5. What was required previously for re-accreditation? Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators On-site Comprehensive Evaluation every 10 years  Self-study prior to Comprehensive Evaluation  200+ page report produced for evaluation team

6. How has the process changed? New process called “Open Pathway” replaces PEAQ (Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality) New timeline for comprehensive evaluations Separation of Quality Assurance from institutional Quality Initiative for improvement

7. Open Pathway Verifies that we are:  Meeting threshold standards  Quality Assurance (Criteria for Accreditation)  Engaged in continuous improvement  Quality Initiative

8. Two Separate Timelines

9. Quality Assurance Timeline Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators Two Comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews in a 10 year cycle On-site peer review in Year 10 (2016-17) Off-site panel review in Year 4 of next cycle (2020-21)

10. Quality Assurance Timeline Note: we’re entering the timeline mid-stream

11. Quality Assurance Timeline Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators Two comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews No formalized self-study Electronic files continuously submitted to HLC Assurance System Assurance Argument submitted in Years 4 and 10

12. Quality Assurance Timeline

13. Annual institutional updates and monitoring of financial and non-financial indicators Two comprehensive Quality Assurance Reviews No formalized self-study Revised Criteria for Accreditation Sub-committees assembled for each criterion Primary task is to identify and gather evidence to support the Assurance Argument

14. Revised Criteria for Accreditation Mission (formerly Mission & Integrity) Chair: Christina Curras Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct (Preparing for the Future) Chair: James Mueller Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support (Student Learning and Effective Teaching) Chair: Shane Drefcinski Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement (Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge) Co-Chairs: Colleen McCabe and Laura Bayless Resources, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (Engagement and Service) Chair: Matt Roberts

15. Quality Initiative Required to undertake a major QI designed to suit our present concerns or aspirations.  Can continue an initiative already in progress or achieve a key milestone in the work of a longer initiative  Must have scope and significance QI proposal focuses on implementation and assessment of success of the new program review process for APC

16. Quality Initiative Timeline

17. Summary Different process for accreditation  New timelines  Quality Assurance Argument New Criteria New process of submitting evidence files  Quality Initiative Project Implementation and improvement of APC’s Program Review process

18. Campus Resources HLC Steering Committee  Regular meetings which anyone is welcome to attend Website  Information on the process  Timelines  Contact information