Accountability, Accreditation and Institutional Effectiveness

1. Accountability, Accreditation and Institutional Effectiveness Professional Development Training

2. The Accreditation Process • Once Every Ten Years: • SACS (Southern Association of Colleges and Schools) reaffirms colleges and universities for its region: • 11 states and those in Latin America • States = Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia • Accreditation is important for students wanting course credits to transfer and to receive federal financial aid.

3. SACS Timeline: • In 2002, the Commission on Colleges got rid of the old “must statements” and replaced them with: • Core Requirements • Comprehensive Standards • QEP - Quality Enhancement Plan • Our last visit was in Fall 2002 and our next is in the 2013-2014 year. • SACS report submitted- February 2013 • On-site visit September 24-26

4. The New Process • The accreditation process now includes: • 12 Core Requirements (actually 16 with the sub-requirements) • 14 Comprehensive Standards (59 sub-categories) • A Quality Enhancement Plan • 7 Federal Requirements • The new process calls for reviews from three groups: • An offsite committee • An onsite committee • A QEP subgroup of the onsite committee including several invited experts (our choosing)

5. SACS Requirements and Proposed Changes • Core Requirement 2.5 “The institution engages in , , , planning and evaluation processes that • incorporate a systematic review of institutional mission, goals and outcomes • result in continuing improvement in institutional quality, and • demonstrate that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission (Institutional Effectiveness).” ongoing integrated institution-wide research-based

6. SACS, continued • Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states “The institution • identifies expected outcomes for its educational programsand its administrative and educational support services; • assesses whether it achieves these outcomes; • provides evidence of improvementbased on analysis of those results.” • Comprehensive Standard 3.5.1states “The institution • identifies college-level competencies within the general education coreand • provides evidencethat graduates have attained those competencies.”

7. So an institution needs to put in place …. • Ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that include: • a systematic review of institutional mission, goals and outcomes • Which results in continuing improvement in institutional quality • And demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission

8. So an institution needs to put in place …. • A list of expected outcomes, • Assessment of those outcomes, and • Evidence of improvement, based on analysis of those outcome results in each of the following areas: • educational programs (student learning outcomes at the program and individual level) • administrative support services • educational support services • Identified college-level general education competencies (based on best practices in assessment) and provide evidence that graduates have attained them

9. But Why? • Are we doing this only because of SACS? • Shouldn’t we periodically take a serious look at our students? • Are they learning? Who is learning best? • Are they achieving the outcomes we expected? • Should we make changes in programs and services? Do we need more in-depth services? Do we need a new curriculum or a change in methodology? • Our focus should be on learning and improving, not our assessment processes.

10. A New Eight-step Process for SACS Accreditation • COC staff conducts an orientation for the college’s Leadership Team. • The institution prepares and submits a compliance certification along with appropriate supporting documentation • The off-site committee reviews the compliance certification. The off-site committee prepares a report for each institution. This committee of peers goes to Atlanta the first week of June each year (several hundred) and multiple separate committees review five colleges each.

11. A new eight step process • The commission staff orally communicates to the institution a summary of the report prepared by the off-site committee. The college may choose to submit a focused report. The onsite committee receives copies of both reports. • The institution submits its QEP to the commission and the on-site committee (4-6 weeks before the onsite visit).

12. A new eight step process • The onsite committee visits the college to review areas of non-compliance, any other areas of concern and to determine the acceptability of the QEP. The onsite committee submits a report to COC. • The college prepares a response to the onsite committee report and submits it to the commission. • The commission reviews the findings included in the report of the onsite committee and the college’s response and takes action on the institution’s reaffirmation.

13. The Process • While some at the college will be working on the focused reports, another group will be working on the QEP. • So let’s discuss the QEP

14. What is it? • The QEP is a carefully designed and focused course of action that addressesone or more criticalissues related to enhancing studentlearning. • The selected topic should • complement what the institution is already doingand • be incorporated into its ongoing planning and evaluation process.

15. The QEP • It is “forward-looking” or “future oriented” and thus transforms the process into an ongoing activity rather than an episodic event (not a boutique program). • The overall goal should be to help the institution create a plan to increasethe effectiveness of some aspect of its educational program relating to student learning.

16. The QEP • At the time it is submitted to the COC, it is a plan that launches a process that can move the institution into a future characterized by creative, engaging and meaningfullearning experiences for students. • Student learning may include: • changes in students’ knowledge, skills, behaviors and/or values • that may be attributable to their college experience.

17. Sample Topics • Enhancing the academic climate for student learning • Strengthening the general studies curriculum • Developing creative approaches to experiential learning • Enhancing critical thinking skills • Introducing innovative teaching and learning strategies • Increasing student engagement in learning • Exploring imaginative ways to use technology in the classroom • ALL MUST BE CLEARLY LINKED TO IMPROVING STUDENT LEARNING!

18. QEP Update...Where are we now? • selection committee formed spring 2011 • QEP themes identified: Developmental Education Career Readiness Online Courses Information Literacy First Year Experience Highest Enrollment courses • Survey to employees, students, community to gather data on topics • Themes narrowed, call for white papers summer 2011 Topic chosen for CPCC:First Year Students-creating ways to help first year students succeed

19. QEP Update...Where are we now? Upcoming timeline: • QEP will be submitted- July 2013 • QEP pilot- September 2013 • Pilot of QEP must be done before expanding QEP to entire college

20. Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC Our individual Role in Accreditation

21. The Process at CPCC • The Institutional Effectiveness Plan is a four-pronged approach: • Annual goal setting • Annual program review • The assessment of general education • The College’s annual assessment plan

22. Annual Goal Setting • The College establishes strategic goals through the strategic planning process (Board and Cabinet approve every fall) • Individual units set performance objectives to support the College’s goals in the Spring • Mid-year and end-of-year progress reports are made (December and May) • The Institutional Effectiveness Report is written in the Summer and distributed at the Fall Forum

23. Annual Program Review • All College units are reviewed • All instructional programs (a portion each year over a five year cycle) • All Administrative Services units, Enrollment and Student Services units and units reporting to the President’s Office (over a three year cycle) • Completed program reviews go to the Vice President of each unit; Results are reported to their councils, the Cabinet and then college-wide • Needs and future issues are identified • Implications for planning and budgeting are addressed • One year follow-ups are completed (closing the loop)

24. General Education Goals • A General Education Committee revised the goals in 2000-2001 and created an assessment process for the College • In order to measure general education goals, a portfolio is created each year that includes: • Definitions of competencies by general education area • Learning outcome targets • Sample works • A full report by each individual general education area

25. College’s Assessment Program • Each year the following surveys/reports are done and reported to the college community: • Graduate Follow-up Survey • Faculty-staff Survey • Current Student Survey (curriculum, literacy and CCE) • Enhanced Accountability Report • Program Review Surveys • Student Opinion Surveys

26. Accountability Measures for 2011-2012 Report for Central Piedmont Community College

27. Mandate for Accountability • Senate Bill1366, Section 10.5 • The General Assembly finds that the current annual program review standards are not adequate to ensure that programs are meeting the needs of students, employers, and the general public; therefore, the State Board of Community Colleges shall review the current standard to ensure a higher degree of program accountability and shall establish appropriate levels of performance for each measure based on sound methodological practices.

28. Performance Measures-Old vs. New

29. 2011-2012New Process for NC Accountability Measures • 8 measures • All NC Community College’s data is combined and the system office has created a GOALand a BASELINE benchmark. • This process compares how we measure to other colleges.

30. A. Basic Skills Student Progress Benchmark: Percentage of students who progress as defined by an educational functioning level. • 49.8%- CPCC above college mean; below goal (2,356 students out of 4,730 progressed)

31. B. GED Diploma Passing Rate Benchmark: Percentage of students taking at least one GED test during a program year who receive a GED diploma during the program year. • 75.1%- CPCC above college mean; below goal (289 students out of 385 passed GED test)

32. C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College-Level English Courses Benchmark: Percentage of previous developmental English and/or reading students who successfully complete a credit English course with a grade of “P”, “C” or better upon the first attempt. • CPCC met the GOAL- 77.8% (1,457 students out of 1,872 had a C or better or “P” upon first attempt)

33. D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College-Level Math Courses Benchmark: Percentage of previous developmental math students who successfully complete a credit math course with a “C” or better upon the first attempt. • 71.5%-CPCC above college mean; below goal (993 students out of 1,388 had a “C “ or better upon first attempt.)

34. E. First Year Progression Benchmark: Percentage of first-time fall credential-seeking students attempting at least twelve hours within their first academic year who successfully complete (“P”, “C” or better) at least twelve of those hours • 70.3%- CPCC above college mean; below goal

35. F. Curriculum Completion Benchmark: Percentage of first-time fall credential-seeking students who graduate, transfer, or are still enrolled with 36 hours after six years • 36.7% - CPCC Above Baseline, Below Mean

36. G. Licensure & Certification Passing Rate Description: Aggregate institutional passing rate of first time test-takers on licensure and certification exams. Exams included in this measure are state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners. • CPCC met the GOAL(92.3%)

37. G. Passing Rates for State Licensure Exams 2011-2012

38. H. Performance of 2010-2011College Transfer Students Benchmark: Among community college associate degree completers and those who have completed 30 or more credit hours who transfer to a four-year university or college, the percentage who earn a GPA of 2.00 or better after two consecutive semesters within the academic year at the transfer institution. • 86.9% of associate degree CPCC transfer students were in good academic standing. (2.0 GPA or better) • 86% of those with 30+ hours (579) were in good academic standing.

39. H. Performance of 2010-2011College Transfer Students • 86.9%- CPCC above college mean; below goal

40. Overall Success by CPCC Accountability Measures for 2011-12 • Basic Skills Student Progress-above mean; below goal • GED Diploma Passing Rate-above mean; below goal • Developmental Student Success Rate in College-Level English Courses- met Goal • Developmental Student Success Rate in College-Level Math Courses-above mean; below goal • First Year Progression-above mean; below goal • Curriculum Completion-above baseline; below mean • Licensure & Certification Passing Rate-met Goal • Performance ofCollege Transfer Students- above mean; below goal

41. Questions? • Our website: • http://www.cpcc.edu/ie