Middle states self study
1 / 33

Middle States Self-Study - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated On :

Middle States Self-Study. Salisbury University 2003-2006. What is a Middle States accreditation?. 10-year interval of self-examination, external review, and commission approval (with a 5 year Periodic Review Report) that an institution meets specified regional standards of quality

Related searches for Middle States Self-Study

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Middle States Self-Study' - lotus

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Middle states self study l.jpg

Middle States Self-Study

Salisbury University


What is a middle states accreditation l.jpg
What is a Middle States accreditation?

  • 10-year interval of self-examination, external review, and commission approval (with a 5 year Periodic Review Report) that an institution meets specified regional standards of quality

  • Initial approval is accreditation; subsequent renewal is reaccreditation

  • A requirement for receiving federal funding (student financial aid grants and loans, federal grants, etc.)

  • In the Middle States region, affirmation of 14 standards of higher education achievement

Why accreditation l.jpg
Why accreditation?

  • The “good housekeeping seal of approval” for proprietary schools, colleges, and universities, primary and secondary school systems

  • An honest look at the University’s demonstrated strengths and challenges

  • Institutional renewal—opportunity to renew strengths, assess continuing challenges, and identify new challenges

  • Consensus recommendations for the next decade

Regional commissions of the council for higher education accreditation l.jpg
Regional Commissions of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation

  • New England

  • Southern

  • North Central

  • Western

  • Northwest

  • Middle States--serving New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as the Mid-East, Near-East, Africa, and Europe.

Goals of su s self study l.jpg
Goals of SU’s Self-Study Accreditation

  • The Middle States Self-Study provides a forum to conduct a comprehensive review of SU’s suppositions, practices, programs, personnel, policies, and institutional habits. By conducting a multiyear, data-driven and consensus-based study of its own strengths and opportunities for change, Salisbury University will

  • involve the campus community and constituent communities in an assessment of Salisbury’s mission, educational programs, activities, ongoing processes of planning, resource allocation, and institutional renewal;

  • provide a framework for continual improvement of Salisbury University’s educational and administrative inclusiveness and effectiveness;

  • enhance the shared understanding of Salisbury’s central purpose as an educational institution;

  • create a common vision of where the institution will go in the future; and

  • provide comprehensive and coherent recommendations for Salisbury University’s next decade (2006-16)—recommendations that have been carefully crafted, assessed, and affirmed by its constituencies.

What is the timeline and process for salisbury l.jpg
What is the timeline and process for Salisbury? Accreditation

  • √ Fall 2003: Steering committee of the self study appointed

  • √ Spring 2004: Creating the self-study design

  • Fall 2004: Campus affirmation and Middle States √ approval of the design; √ formation of working groups. Nov 5th—Campus visit by Middle States liaison

  • Spring 2005: Working groups investigate and write their reports

  • Summer 2005: First draft of the self-study report

  • Fall 2005: Completion of report—Campus visit by team chair

  • February 2006 (3-1/2 days): 10-member team visit

  • Spring and summer 2006: Commission action (spring and summer 2006) and any campus response

Choice of the self study design l.jpg
Choice of the Self-Study Design Accreditation

  • Comprehensive (60-75% of Middle States institutions)

  • Comprehensive with special emphasis/emphases (13-28%)

  • Special focus periodic self-study (12%)

  • After discussion, the steering committee narrowed its options to

    • comprehensive review

    • comprehensive review with special emphasis (with diversity, resource allocation, and institutional renewal as contenders for such special emphasis)

  • Decision: the committee chose

    • a comprehensive review process in which diversity, resource allocation, and institutional renewal are central components within its working groups—a characteristic example of consensus work that marked the steering committee’s deliberations.

    • Five working groups that combine the 14 standards & SU’s six values (excellence, student-centeredness, learning, community, civic engagement, diversity)

What have we accomplished so far l.jpg
What have we accomplished so far? Accreditation

  • The Self-Study Design Document

  • Five Working Groups with over 75 campus participants

    • 1. Academic Excellence: Faculty and Curriculum

    • 2. Student-Centeredness, Mission, and Institutional Identity

    • 3. Diversity and Globalization

    • 4. Community Engagement, Governance, and Leadership

    • 5. Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

  • 258 analytical charging questions (38 to 69 per working group)

  • Approval of the design (7/1/04)—Middle States indicates “the design is overall an excellent one, and it reflects the very active participation of the steering committee and working groups, particularly in the development of thoughtful charge questions.”

What will each working group do l.jpg
What will each Working Group do? Accreditation

  • assess the University’s current effectiveness in meeting the specific categories and Middle States standards assigned to it;

  • write a 25-page report (6300 words) plus tables, charts and appendices, responding to its charging questions, submitted to the self-study chair by May 1, 2005;

  • make a clear set of recommendations for the next decade to address topics the working group considers necessary.

14 standards l.jpg

Std 1: Mission, Goals, and Objectives Accreditation

Std 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

Std 3: Institutional Resources

Std 4: Leadership and Governance

Std 5: Administration

Std 6: Integrity

Std 7: Institutional Assessment

Std 8: Student Admissions

St. 9: Student Support Services

Std 10: Faculty

Std 11:Educational Offerings

Std 12: General Education

Std 13: Related Educational Activities

Std 14: Assessment of Student Learning

14 Standards

Standard 1 mission goals and objectives l.jpg
Standard 1:Mission, Goals, and Objectives Accreditation

  • The institution’s mission clearly defines its purposes within the context of higher education and explains whom the institution serves and what it intends to accomplish.

  • The institution’s stated goals and objectives, consistent with the aspirations and expectations of higher education, clearly specify how the institution will fulfill its mission.

  • The mission, goals, and objectives are developed and recognized by the institution with its members and its governing body and are utilized to develop and shape its programs and practices and to evaluate its effectiveness. (Working Groups 2 and 4)

Standard 2 planning resource allocation and institutional renewal l.jpg
Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

  • An institution conducts planning and resource allocation on its mission and utilizes the results of its assessment activities for institutional renewal.

  • Implementation and subsequent evaluation of the success of the strategic plan and resource allocation support the development and change necessary to improve and to maintain institutional quality. (Working Group 5)

Standard 3 institutional resources l.jpg
Standard 3: Institutional Resources Renewal

  • The human, technical, physical facilities and other resources necessary to achieve an institution’s mission and goals are available and accessible.

  • In the context of the institution’s mission, the effective and efficient uses of the institution’s resources are analyzed as part of ongoing outcomes assessment. (Working Group 5)

Standard 4 leadership and governance l.jpg
Standard 4: Leadership and Governance Renewal

  • The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decision-making.

  • The governance structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and resource development, consistent with the mission of the institution. (Working Group 4)

Standard 5 administration l.jpg
Standard 5: Administration Renewal

  • The institution’s administrative structure and services facilitate learning and research/scholarship, foster the improvement of quality, and support the institution’s recognition and governance. (Working Group 4)

Standard 6 integrity l.jpg
Standard 6: Integrity Renewal

  • In the conduct of its programs and activities involving the public and the constituencies it serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to ethical standards and its own stated policies, providing support to academic and intellectual freedom. (Working Groups 1, 2, 4, and 5)

Standard 7 institutional assessment l.jpg
Standard 7: Institutional Assessment Renewal

  • The institution has developed and implemented an assessment plan and process that evaluates its overall effectiveness in

    • achieving its mission and goals;

    • implementing planning, resource allocation, and institutional renewal processes;

    • using institutional resources efficiently;

    • providing leadership and governance;

    • providing administrative structures and services;

    • demonstrating institutional integrity;

    • and assuring that institutional processes and resources support appropriate learning and other outcomes for its students and graduates. (Working Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

Standard 8 student admissions l.jpg
Standard 8: Student Admissions Renewal

  • The institution seeks to admit students whose interests, goals, and abilities are congruent with its mission. (Working Groups 2 and 3)

Standard 9 student support services l.jpg
Standard 9: Student Support Services Renewal

  • The institution provides student services reasonably necessary to enable each student to achieve the institution’s goals for students. (Working Groups 2 and 3)

Standard 10 faculty l.jpg
Standard 10: Faculty Renewal

  • The institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are devised, developed, monitored, and supported by qualified professionals. (Working Groups 1 and 3)

Standard 11 educational offerings l.jpg
Standard 11: Educational Offerings Renewal

  • The institution’s educational offerings display academic content, rigor, and coherence that are appropriate to its higher educational mission.

  • The institution identifies student learning goals and objectives, including knowledge and skills, for its educational offerings. (Working Groups 1 and 3)

Standard 12 general education l.jpg
Standard 12: General Education Renewal

  • The institution’s curricula are designed so that the students acquire and demonstrate college-level proficiency in general education and essential skills, including

    • oral and written communication,

    • scientific and quantitative reasoning,

    • critical analysis and reasoning,

    • technological competency,

    • and information literacy (Working Groups 1 and 3)

Standard 13 related educational activities l.jpg
Standard 13: Related Educational Activities Renewal

  • Institutional programs or activities that are characterized by the following meet appropriate standards:

    • particular content,

    • focus,

    • location,

    • mode of delivery,

    • or sponsorship (Working Groups 1 and 3)

Standard 14 assessment of student learning l.jpg
Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning Renewal

  • Assessment of student learning demonstrates

    • that the institution’s students have the knowledge, skills, and competencies consistent with institutional goals

    • and that students at graduation have achieved appropriate higher education goals. (Working Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

Middle states steering committee l.jpg

Member Renewal

Robin Adamopoulos

Anita Brown

David Buchanan

Kerri Jones Bunting

Grace Clement

Sandra Cohea-Weible

Betty Crockett

Ron Dotterer

Charles Emery

John Fields

Susan Muller

Darrell Newton

Bryant Penn

Bryan Price

Elizabeth Rankin

Lesley Schiff

Brenda Stanley

Rosemary Thomas

Ying Wu

Ellen Zinner

Relationship with the SU Community

Graduate student

Assistant Professor of Chemistry (alumna)

Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

Alumni Association (alumna)

Associate Professor of Philosophy and Department Chair

Liaison from Academic Affairs to the steering committee

Associate Vice President for Administration and Finance (alumna)

Professor of English and Self-Study Chair

Board of Directors Member: Salisbury University Foundation

Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs (alumnus)

Associate Professor of Physical Education and Faculty Senator

Assistant Professor of Communication and Theatre Arts

Undergraduate student

Director of Institutional Research, Assessment, and Accountability

Professor of Nursing

Staff Technician in Blackwell Library and MCEA representative

Telecommunications Manager and Staff Senate representative

Vice President for University Advancement

Associate Professor of Economics

Assistant to the President

Middle States Steering Committee

Group 1 academic excellence faculty and curriculum l.jpg
Group 1: Academic Excellence: Faculty and Curriculum Renewal

  • Anita Brown, Assistant Professor of Chemistry (alumna) and Ying Wu, Associate Professor of Business (co-chairs). Michael Garner, Professor of Accounting (co-chair, spring 2005)

    • Sandra Cohea-Weible (Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs)

    • Thomas Jones (Dean of the Henson School of Science and Technology)

    • Nancy Michaelson (Associate Professor of Education)

    • Fran Sistrunk (Instructor of Social Work)

    • Donald Spickler (Assistant Professor of Math and Computer Sciences)

    • Tony Whall (Director of the Honors Program and Professor of English)

    • Arlene White (Associate Professor of Modern Languages and General Education Coordinator)

    • an additional staff member

    • undergraduate student

Group 2 student centeredness mission and institutional identity l.jpg
Group 2: RenewalStudent-Centeredness, Mission, and Institutional Identity

  • Byron Hughes Area Director, Housing & Resident Life (alumnus) and Brenda Stanley, Telecommunications Manager (alumna) & Staff Senate rep (co-chairs)

    • Robin Adamopoulos (graduate student)

    • Jennifer Berkman (Director of Student Health Services)

    • David Gutoskey (Assistant Director of Housing/Residence Life)

    • Jason Jacoski (undergraduate student)

    • Kathryn Kalmanson (Head Reference Librarian)

    • Timothy O’Rourke (Dean of the Fulton School of Liberal Arts)

    • Bryant Penn (undergraduate student)

    • Laura Thorpe (Director of Admissions)

    • Ellen Zinner (Assistant to the President)

    • 4 faculty, one from each school

Group 3 diversity and globalization l.jpg
Group 3: RenewalDiversity and Globalization

  • Grace Clement, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Department Chair, and Darrell Newton, Assistant Professor of Communication and Theatre Arts (co-chairs)

    • Marvin Ames (Buildings and Grounds, MCEA representative)

    • Alice Bahr (Dean of Libraries and Instructional Resources)

    • Carolyn Bowden (Associate Professor of Education)

    • Kevin Carreathers (Assistant to the VP of Academic Affairs for Institutional Diversity)

    • James Forte (Assistant Professor of Social Work)

    • Robert Hallworth, Director of International Education

    • Agata Liszkowska (Co-ordinator of International Student Services)

    • Anjali Panday (Associate Professor of English)

    • Jing Quan (Assistant Professor of Information and Decision Sciences)

    • Gerald St. Martin (Professor of Modern Languages)

    • Rosemary Thomas (Vice President for University Advancement)

    • Janine Vienna (M.B.A. Director)

    • Vaughan White (Director of Multiethnic Student Services)

    • Candace Wimberly (undergraduate student, president of NAACP)

Group 4 community engagement governance and leadership l.jpg
Group 4: RenewalCommunity Engagement, Governance, and Leadership

  • John Fields, Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs (alumnus) and Susan Muller, Associate Professor of Physical Education (alumna) and Faculty Senator (co-chairs)

    • Robin Bowen (Campus Recreation)

    • Kerrie Jones Bunting (Alumni Association board member and alumna)

    • Charles Emery (Salisbury University Foundation board member)

    • Bill Folger (Assistant Professor of Music)

    • Francis Kane (Co-Director Public Affairs and Civic Engagement Institute and Professor of Philosophy)

    • Dennis Pataniczek (Dean of the Seidel School of Education and Professional Studies)

    • David Parker (Professor of Math and Computer Science)

    • James Phillips (Chief, University Police)

    • Lesley Schiff (Technician in Blackwell Library and MCEA representative)

    • George Whitehead (Professor of Psychology)

    • undergraduate student

Group 5 planning resource allocation and institutional renewal l.jpg
Group 5: RenewalPlanning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

  • Betty Crockett, Associate Vice President for Administration and Finance(alumna) and Elizabeth Rankin (Professor of Nursing) (co-chair spring and fall 2004). Robert Tardiff Professor of Mathematics (co-chair, spring 2005-on)

    • John Bing (Professor of Education)

    • David Buchanan (Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs)

    • Debra Clark (Executive Administrative Assistant, Seidel School of Education and Professional Studies)

    • Wayne Decker (Professor of Business Administration)

    • Elizabeth Emmert (Assistant Professor of Biology)

    • Lisa Gray (Assistant Director of Book Rack)

    • Bryan Horikami (Advising Co-ordinator, Fulton School of Liberal Arts)

    • Kevin Mann (Director of Physical Plant/Building Trades)

    • Willie Moore (Dean of the Perdue School of Business)

    • Kim Nechay (Assistant Director, SU Foundation)

    • Bryan Price (Director of Institutional Assessment, Research and Accountability)

    • Melissa Thomas (Instructional Designer for Teaching & Learning Network; Staff Senate chair)

    • Undergraduate student

For continually updated information l.jpg
For continually updated information Renewal

  • Or to read more about the Middle States self-study and to find Middle States publications

  • Check the Salisbury University Middle States website at