alo workshop
Post on 30-Oct-2014
12 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1
Accreditation Liaison OfficersAnnual Workshop
SPONSORED BY ACSCU IN COLLABORATION WITH ACCJC
2
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Welcome and Introductions
• WASC Staff– Directors: Keith Bell, Richard Giardina, Diane
Harvey, Dick Osborn, Richard Winn, Ralph Wolff, Barbara Wright
– Managers: Amy Allington, Chris Castagnola, Julie Kotovsky, Henry Hernandez, Sharyl McGrew, Siobhan Williams
– Support Staff: Raymond Lui, Jessica Massoletti, Muey Saechao, Jamie Wilkins
3
Welcome to New ALOs
Recognition of ALO Participation in WASC
Activities
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
4
Status Report on WASC
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
5
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Our Institutions
• 156 accredited and four candidate institutions (as of 06/2009)
• Represents more than 870,000 students • Public institutions = 25% of institutions and
70% of students• 17+% are large (>10,000 FTE) and 42+% are
small (<1000 FTE)
6
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
New WASC Institutions• 18 institutions in eligibility (as of 03/2010)• 41 have applied in the last 10 years, ¾ of these in the
last five years• Very diverse group of institutions:
– 8 already accredited– 9 proprietary, 5 state supported, the rest non-profit– 9 faith-based– 30 are specialized in offerings– Half are graduate-only
7
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Peer Participation in WASC Activities2008-09
• 25 Commissioners• 49 Committee members and 16 Task Force
members• 293 team members
– More diversity than previous years – More CEOs and faculty members
8
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Committee Activity (2008-09)
• 7 Proposals reviewed by the PRC– 3 approved on first review– 4 approved after revision and resubmission
• 10 Interim Reports reviewed by the IRC• 93 Substantive Changes reviewed
– 74 approved– Seven structural changes reviewed and approved
9
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Visit Activity (2009-10)
• 34 Visits in fall 2009 and 32 Visits in spring 2010
• 31 CPR, 27 EER, and 8 Special Visits • 57 Commission actions expected by June
2010*
*Eligibility visits and CPRs for Candidacy are not reviewed by the Commission
10
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Educational Effectiveness ReviewsCompleted
• About 2/3 will have completed an EER by June 2010
• All but four institutions will have completed EERs under the three-stage process by June 2012
11
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Terms of Accreditation Granted(Feb. 2003- Feb. 2010)
Reaccreditation Actions
Year 7 yr 8 – 8 ½ yr
9 – 9 ½ yr
10 yr
2003 1 4
2004 3 5
2005 6 4
2006 3 3
2007 7 0
2008 6 5 1 3
2009 7 3 1 2
2010 4 3 2 1
Total 37 11 4 22
30%
50%
5%
15%
10 Year 7 Year 9-9 1/2 year 8 - 8 1/2 year
12
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
More on Commission Actions• Increase in Interim Reports• Most frequent issues for Interim Reports and
Special Visits– Educational effectiveness/assessment/outcomes– Financial issues
13
Educational Activities
• Academic Resource Conference – Annual attendance: 750-850, representing 200-
250 institutions
• Educational Seminars/Workshops– Enrollment reached 750 this year, representing
almost 250 institutions• Includes assessment workshops, program review (new
this year), president/trustee workshops
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
14
Assessment Leadership Academy
• Designed to prepare the next generation of leaders in assessment– Building capacity and intellectual capital
• 59 applied; 30 admitted• Ten-month program, March to January• In-person and online • Prominent leaders in higher education
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
15
Dues and Fees
• No general dues increases in 2009-10 and 2010-11– Increase in the number of FTE tiers – New site maintenance fee ($100 per site)– Change in multi-site fees for visits ($500 per site)
• Substantive Change– Increase in fees for changes in ownership and control
• Eligibility, Candidacy and Initial Accreditation– Increase in fee for application for candidacy– New fee for initial accreditation of institutions already
accredited
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
16
Future Directions of Accountability and Public Policy
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
17
Key Public Policy Issues
• Retention and graduation/cost• Student learning outcomes• Online education: rapid growth and
questions of quality• The rapid rise of for-profit higher
education
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
18
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
New and Proposed Regulations
• State authorization • New and proposed federal regulations • Definitions of the degrees
19
DEFINING THE CREDIT HOUR: DRAFT REGULATORY LANGUAGE602.24 Additional procedures that certain institutional accreditors
must have: [after striking out reference to Carnegie Unit criteria](c) Credit Hour Policies. The accrediting agency, as part of its review of an institution for initial accreditation or preaccreditation or renewal of accreditation, must conduct an effective review and evaluation of the reliability and accuracy of the institution’s assignment of credit hours.
The agency meets this requirement if – (1) It reviews the institution’s –
(i) Policies and procedures for determining the credit hours that it assigns to courses and programs; and (ii) The application of the institution’s policies and procedures to its programs and coursework; and
(2) Makes a reasonable determination of whether the institution’s assignment of credit hours conforms to accepted practice in higher education.
20
(3) In reviewing and evaluating whether an institution’s policies and procedures for determining credit hour assignments, an accrediting agency may use sampling or other methods in the evaluation sufficient to comply with (2).
(4) The accrediting agency must take such actions that it deems appropriate to address any deficiencies identified at an institution as part of its evaluations under paragraph (c) (1) and (2) of this section, as it does in relation to other deficiencies it may identify, subject to the requirements of the criteria for recognition for enforcement of agency requirements.
(5) If, following the institutional review process under this paragraph, the agency finds systematic noncompliance with the agency’s policies and significant noncompliance regarding one or more programs at the institution, the agency shall promptly notify the Secretary.
21
Implications of Policy Discussions for WASC and its Institutions
• Raises questions about the credibility of accreditation as an agent of quality assurance and accountability
• Calls for greater transparency and clarity about what we do and what it means
• Has implications for the next Handbook revisions
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
22
Task Force on Student Success
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
23
Background on Task Forces
• 2008-09 Task Forces– Program Review – Transparency and Accountability
• 2008-10 Task Force on Student Success
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
24
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
MembersTask Force on Student Success
• Heather Brown, 2009-10Assistant Vice President, Institutional Planning and ResearchMount St. Mary's College
• Gillian Butler, 2008-10Director, Student Affairs Research and InformationUC Davis
• Nandini Dasgupta, 2009-10Director, Institutional Research and Evaluation Samuel Merritt University
• Cherron Hoppes, 2008-10 Dean, Undergraduate ProgramsGolden Gate University
• Cel Johnson, 2009-10
Executive Director, Institutional Research and PlanningUniversity of San Diego
• Halyna Kornuta, Chair of the Task Force in 2008-09Director of Educational EffectivenessCalifornia Lutheran University
• Sheri McKenzie, 2008-10Vice President for Enrollment ManagementCalifornia College of the Arts
• Jose Moreno, 2008-10Assistant ProfessorCSU Long Beach
• Eduardo Ochoa, 2008-10Provost Sonoma State University
• Jing Wang, 2009-10Director of Institutional ResearchCalifornia State University, Sacramento
• Fred Wood, 2008-09Vice Chancellor, Student AffairsUniversity of California, Davis
• Samples Consultant: David Fairris • Vice Provost, Undergraduate Education• UC Riverside
• Responder: William A. LadusawVice Provost and Dean, Undergraduate EducationUniversity of California, Santa Cruz
25
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Task Force Report on Student Success
• Introduction• Collecting and Analyzing Data: The Workbook• Making Meaning of and Acting on Data• Elements of an Effective Student Success
Program• Appendices
26
TFSS: Introduction
• Why are retention and graduation rates so important? How did we get here?– 2001 shift in emphasis from inputs to outcomes– Greater focus on student learning and
achievement– Findings from reviews– The national policy discussion– 2008 formalized requirements to address
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
27
Collecting and Analyzing Data
Retention and Graduation RatesTime to Degree
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
2828
IPEDS Requirements
• IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey:Retention rates for full- and part-time freshmen
• IPEDS Graduation Rate Survey:Graduation rates for full-time freshmen at 4, 5, 6, and 8 years
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
2929
Cohorts to Track
• IPEDS: first-time, degree-seeking students– Retention rates for full time and part time– Graduation rates for full time
• WASC: additional entering cohorts– Transfer student cohorts– Graduate student cohorts
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3030
Cohort Issues
• Full- and part-time students: separate cohorts?
• Transfers: class standing or year of entry?
• Grad students: single or combined programs?
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3131
Demographic Indicators
• IPEDS: federally mandated– Gender– Race/ethnicity
• WASC: mission oriented, problem oriented– In or out of state– Previous school type (high school or college)– Entering test scores– Advanced standing
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3232
Academic Environment Indicators
• Resident or commuter• Undergraduate major or graduate program• STEM or non-STEM field• Varsity athletic teams• Financial aid factors• Participation in targeted program• Remediation status
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3333
Time to Degree
• No federal requirements
• Another way to look at success– Looks backward rather than forward– Focus is on graduating cohorts– Looks at efficiency rather than effectiveness– Academic environment factors are fixed
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3434
Cohorts and Data• Use IPEDS Completions graduating cohort
– Gender and race/ethnicity– Major
• Add essential data– Date of entry– Status at entry (freshman or transfer)
• Add more indicators– Demographic– Academic environment
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3535
Measurement Options
• Time elapsed between entry and graduation– Calendar time– Academic years
• Terms enrolled between entry and graduation
• Credits accumulated at time of graduation
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
3636
Using the Results• Establish overall rates and targets
– Internal studies– Peer comparisons
• Disaggregate the data appropriately• Identify groups or programs with problems• Determine the reasons for the differences• Establish programs to improve experiences• Assess, evaluate, and repeat as necessary!
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
37
TFSS: Making Meaning of and Acting on Data
• Making meaning of data• Acting on data
• Finding comparative data
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
38
Making Meaning of the Data
• Take stock of existing reports, and look for ways to enhance them
• Involve members from various groups in discussion of the scope, design and purpose of the reports
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
39
Making Meaning of the Data • Consider how responsibilities for success and
retention performance are currently distributed– Involve those who have clear responsibility for
contributing to student success and – those who don’t typically consider these
indicators on a routine basis (e.g., admissions, financial aid).
• The idea: get fresh perspectives, consensus about future goals and improvements
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
40
Taking ActionConsider formal decision-making processes and
extent to which they are they informed by student performance
Questions for exploration (see also p. 22 of report)• How are measures of student success incorporated into the
cyclical program review process?• Is there a comprehensive retention and graduation plan?• Have student success goals and objectives been established
in the strategic plan?• How do retention and graduation rates and/or the
achievement of goals and objectives factor into annual and long range resource allocation processes?‐ ‐
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
41
Taking Action• Review and reassess performance,
measures and action on a regular basis
“It’s really no longer a question of whether institutions can get the data they need – it’s whether they invest in analyzing the data they already have. Using information to drive improvement is a consistent theme among high-performing institutions….” ~ K.Carey for EdTrust
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
42
Finding Comparative Data and Benchmarking: Resources
• IPEDS• College Results Online (from The Education
Trust) – draws upon IPEDS GRS data with friendlier interface
• College Insight (from the Institute for College Access & Success)
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
43
More Resources
• Information from state systems and membership in various consortia
• Consortium for Student Retention Data Exchange (CSRDE)
• National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
44
Making meaning of and taking action on data requires
time and attention on
• details and the bigger picture• internal and external perspective
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
45
TFSS: Effective Student Success Programs
• Elements of an effective program– Data based– Collaboratively developed– Targeted and strategic– Accountability established– Tracking, assessing and adjusting planned
• Samples– Built on analysis of data– Proven effective by data
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
46
TFSS: Appendices
• Workbook and Spreadsheet• Examples of Process/Key Indicators• Samples• Bibliography
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
47
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
TFSS Report: ALO Discussion Groups
• Large(ish) comprehensive undergraduate and graduate
• Small(ish) with undergraduate focus• Specialized or limited range of degree
programs• E.g., seminaries, fine arts/art, health care, and
psychology • Graduate only; doctorate only
48
TFSS Report: Discussion Group Questions
• What is most useful? Works best? Seems most relevant?
• What is unclear? Insufficiently developed? Not relevant to you?
• What is missing?• Who at your institution would use this?
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
49
Task Force on Student Success
Final Thoughts
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
50
WASC Updates
Substantive ChangeTechnology
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
51
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Substantive Change Policy
• Fast Track– Authorization extended from 4 to 5 years– No site visits at end of authorization period
• Blended degree category eliminated• Contracts with Unaccredited Organizations• Verification of Online Student Identity
52
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Substantive ChangeMore Updates
• More proposal samples on web– samples.wascsenior.org
• Revised Substantive Change Manual• Increase in some Structural Change fees
53
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
New/Revised Substantive Change PoliciesComing in July 2010
• Authorization for off-campus sites, if:• +3 off-campus sites• Accredited more than 10 years• Sufficient capacity
• Policy on Dual and Joint Degrees
54
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Technology Update
55
Handbook Revision
Strategic Vision for the Handbook 2012-2020
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
56
2001 Handbook of Accreditation• Background and history
– From inputs to outcomes– Culture of evidence– Emphasis on student learning– Formative and developmental approach
• Refinements and improvements• Learning from external review• Learning from evaluations
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
57
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Handbook Revision: Inclusive, open, seeking innovation
• Review of Handbook every seven years• Promise to the region to review the Standards
and three-stage process after full implementation
• Need for adaptations re:– external accountability and other external factors– internal improvement
58
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Goals for the Handbook Revision
• Increase accountability for high levels of student achievement (outcomes and retention/graduation)
• Implement accreditation process cost effectively using technology
• Promote and disseminate good practice
59
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Conditions to be considered …
• Global and national economics• National degree attainment goals/retention
and graduation rates• Absolute levels of learning v. assessment
process• The meaning of a baccalaureate degree/
“degree level frameworks”
60
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
More conditions …
• Emerging institutional structures• Rapid growth of online education• Promoting, not impairing, innovation• Transparency: Institutional and WASC
61
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
Steps and Structures for the Handbook Revision Process
• Survey of presidents, CAOs, ALOs, faculty• Focus groups of employers, students and parents • Meetings with key groups (systems, affinity groups)• NCHEMS reliability study• Regional concept development sessions• Online discussion• Analysis of data and evaluations; studies (e.g. Boyce)• Development of pilots
62
Structures
• Vision statement/philosophy• Steering committee• Committees on policies, e.g., graduate
education, international studies, collective bargaining, diversity, credit for prior learning
• Committee on Institutional Review Process• Committee on Standards of Accreditation
63
Handbook Revision: First Chance for Input
• What works best about the process?– What do you most value about the process? – What do you want to preserve?
• What has not worked well?– What would you most like to change? OR– How can we help you to address your challenges?
• What policy issues should be addressed in the revisions?
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
64
Thank You Accreditation Liaison Officers!
SUSTAINABILITY: A VISIONFOR HIGHER EDUCATION
2010 WASC CONFERENCE
top related