1 / 19

Accreditation Purpose, Not Process

Accreditation Purpose, Not Process. Sonny Ramaswamy. Context for Accreditation. Reauthorization of Higher Education Act Negotiated rulemaking Political environment Calls for transparency and disaggregated data Enrollment and financial challenges Managing change. Purpose of Accreditation.

hasbrouck
Download Presentation

Accreditation Purpose, Not Process

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AccreditationPurpose, Not Process Sonny Ramaswamy

  2. Context for Accreditation • Reauthorization of Higher Education Act • Negotiated rulemaking • Political environment • Calls for transparency and disaggregated data • Enrollment and financial challenges • Managing change

  3. Purpose of Accreditation • Peer evaluative process for assessing educational quality, stability, and sustainability by applying a set of standards, eligibility requirements, and policies • Institutions qualify for Federal Title IV funds and grants and contracts • Institutional reputation • Purpose • Student achievement, learning, and success • Accountability • Quality assurance • Continuous improvement USDE States BC Accreditors

  4. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) • Title 34 – Education • Part 602 – The Secretary’s Recognition of Accrediting Agencies • Subpart B - The Criteria for Recognition. Required Operating Policies and Procedures • Metrics • Retention, Graduation, Default rates NACIQI , Employment Accreditors

  5. Accreditation and Institutional Improvement • Institutional Effectiveness • Outcomes • Student Success • Costs and Indebtedness • Become a learning organization • Institutional critical thinking • Innovation • Programmatic improvements • Effective governance • Improved infrastructure • Improved processes • Continuous improvement

  6. A New Path: Purpose, Not Process

  7. NWCCU’s Mission Reflecting Purpose The Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities accredits institutions of higher education by applying evidence-informed standards and processes to support continuous improvements and promote student achievement and success • Student achievement, learning, success • Educational quality • Institutional effectiveness • Continuous improvement • Analytical self-assessment Foci • Critical peer review • Accountability and transparency • Data and evidence-informed • Equity • Research and engagement

  8. 7-Year Cycle Risk-Based Accreditation • Within-Type Core Measures/Outcomes • Base Goals • Institutional • Regional Peers • National Peers • Aspirational Goals • Institutional • Regional Peers • National Peers Expectations Exceeds Meets Below

  9. Risk-Based Institutional Engagement Innovate and Experiment • Exceeds Expectations • Self-guided continuous improvement • Meets Expectations • NWCCU-guided continuous improvement • Peer review focused on flags during risk assessment • Below Expectations • Mandatory improvement plan • Review of QUALITY and COMPLIANCE aspects of institution • Coordination with State and Federal regulations

  10. Aspirational Foundational Eligibility Requirements and Standards (eligibility) requirement| noun a thing that is compulsory; a necessary condition standard | noun a required or agreed level of quality or attainment

  11. Eligibility Requirements, Standards, Policies Eligibility Requirements • Eligibility requirements are foundational qualifications and conditions that an institution MUST meet to be considered for accreditation. The Eligibility Requirements establish the basis for determining that the institution is accreditable as a higher education institution and has developed sufficient planning and operational activities to provide a basis for initial accreditation in five years Standards • Standards articulate the quality and effectiveness expected of accredited institutions. The Standards provide the criteria for evaluating institutional quality and effectiveness Policies • A practice or principle of action required by the NWCCU and/or the USDE. Member institutions must comply with applicable policies

  12. Imagine: Eligibility Requirements with Purpose • Focus and Independence • Operational Status • Authority • Institutional Effectiveness • Student Learning • Student Achievement • Non-discrimination • Institutional Integrity • Governance/Leadership • Student Support Services • Infrastructure

  13. Imagine: Standards with Purpose Proposed New Standards Core Competencies/ General Education • Institutional Effectiveness (QUALITY) • Foci • Goals • Indicators • Student Success • Core competencies • Program learning outcomes • Retention • Completion • Graduation • Capacity, Resources, Governance (COMPLIANCE) • Offsite and Onsite Review • Learning how to learn/ metacognition • Critical thinking • Problem solving • Information literacy • Global perspective • Integrative learning • Quantitative reasoning • Digital competencies • Ethical responsibility • Collaboration • Communication skills USDE Requirements Student success & achievement Curricula Faculty Facilities, equipment, supplies Fiscal & administrative Student support services Recruiting & admissions Program measures Student complaints Title IV

  14. Proposed New Standards STANDARD ONE – INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS • Institutional Mission • Institutional Effectiveness • Student Learning • Student Achievement STANDARD TWO – GOVERNANCE, RESOURCES, & CAPACITY • Governance • Policies and Procedures • Institutional Integrity • Financial Resources • Human Resources • Student Support Resources • Library and Information Resources • Physical and Technology Infrastructure

  15. The Process and Timeline Sept-Dec 2018 Sept-Dec 2018 Feb-Mar-Apr-May 2019 Dec 2018 Jan 2019 Members Vote Jun 2019 Jul 2019 Aug 2019 Oct-Dec 2019 Jan 2020

  16. The Process • Annual submission • Staff review • Red flags and non-compliant recommendations moved to Commission Meeting Agenda • Onsite peer review in Year 3 • Staff review of evaluation reports for Commission Meeting consent agenda • Offsite peer review in Year 6 • Non-compliant findings written reported to EIE Evaluation Team in Year 7 • Commission Meeting Consent Agenda • Onsite peer review in Year 7 • Review of red flag and non-compliant findings from PRFR • Commission Meeting Agenda

  17. What We Hope to Accomplish • Develop a relationship with institutions that fosters Continuous Quality Improvement focused on outcomes • Engage faculty and other campus entities to become more fully and meaningfully involved in accreditation • Create a process that inspires achievement of institutional aspirational goals versus a punitive or “Gotcha” process

  18. Aligning Efforts • Retention, persistence, and student success academies • Mission fulfillment fellowship programs • Workshops • Webinars • Networking, best practices, mentoring • Annual conferences • Commission staff and other resources • Rethinking purpose

  19. Accreditation … is a journey, and not a destination

More Related