Evaluator 102: An Introduction to Interpreting the Standards

1. Evaluator 102:An Introduction to Interpreting the Standards Dr. Luis G. Pedraja MSCHE Vice President

2. Overview of the Standards • 14 Standards, in 2 sections: • Institutional Context (Standards 1 – 7) • Educational Effectiveness (Standards 8 – 14) • Each section concludes with an assessment standard (7 & 14)

3. Format: Each Standard • Standard • Context • Fundamental Elements • Optional Analysis and Evidence

4. Fundamental Elements & the Self-Study • In conjunction with institutional mission & goals, fundamental elements help to frame self-study questions • Elements guide institutions in demonstrating how they comply with the standards • Elements help frame the self-study analysis and recommendations

5. Fundamental Elements & the Team Visit • Help to frame the team’s questions • Must be viewed in the context of the institution’s mission and its self-study design and report • Together (not individually) the Fundamental Elements constitute and encompass the standard • Elements are not a checklist

6. Fundamental Elements & the Team Visit, continued • Fundamental elements are subordinate to the accreditation standard • Elements are likely reference points for commendations, suggestions, recommendations, and/or requirements

7. Optional Analysis & Evidence • Used by institution as part of its own self-study • Not intended for use by the team for evaluation • Information is optional for the institution and not required

8. Evaluating Compliance • Does the self-study narrative demonstrate compliance? • Do they have documentedevidence that supports and demonstrates compliance? • Are they doing “it” or do they plan to do it? • Are their plans, activities & projections realistic? • Do documents & interviews support the claims of the self-study? • Do they have realistic plans for improvement?

9. Applying the Standards & the Team Report

10. Report Templates & Self-Study • Self-Study structure will affect how standards are covered in the report • Comprehensive models • Structured according to standards • Grouping of Standards • Topical Approach • Selected Topics model • Collaborative model

11. What does the report look like? • Standard (s) Covered • Narrative of Findings • Commendations • Suggestions • Recommendations (need some follow-up) • Requirements (non-compliance) • Other Information • People interviewed • Documents reviewed • About 1-2 pages per Evaluator

12. Types of Findings • Suggestions = optional consultative advice • Recommendations = actions needed to continue improvement or to assure continuing compliance • Requirements = actions needed to achieve compliance

13. Types of Follow-Up • Suggestions -> no follow-up • Recommendations -> routinely addressed through PRR; team may request earlier follow-up through progress letter or monitoring report • Requirements -> warning, probation, show cause (monitoring report) OR postponement (supplemental information report)

14. Exercise • Read the fictitious team report on Standard 14. • Based on the report determine: • does the institution meet the standard? Why or why not? • What action would you recommend, based on this one standard, for the institution?