OFFICE OF INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCEMENT
Accreditation:
SACS Commission on Colleges
NC Regional Meeting on Accreditation Review Project
October 10, 2000
Synopsis
The Accreditation Review Project is a comprehensive review of both accreditation requirements and peer review process. If approved, it will replace the current Criteria and process.
Features of proposed changes:
- Increased attention to quality enhancement
- Increased attention to student learning outcomes
- Greater flexibility in addressing these requirements
- More institutional accountability/responsibility
- More focused on-site review
- Increased consistency in application by visiting teams
- Emphasis on learning and learning environment
- Strong culture of institutional integrity essential
- College mission and commitment to improve taken into account
- More analysis of critical issues, less descriptive narrative
- More forward thinking rather than historical
- Shorter time frame for reaccredidation efforts
- Maintains 10 year accreditation cycle
General sense of NC regional meeting:
- Heading in a good direction overall
- Some concerns on individual requirements and wording
Pilot of new model
8 institutions selected for pilot, including 2 community colleges:
John Tyler CC (VA) and Richmond College (TX)
Pilot institutions will explore potential for electronic submissions in the accreditation process
Implementation Calendar for New Model
- October 2000 Regional Meetings and Website Call for Comments
- November 2000 Task Force Meetings to review comments received and make revisions
- December 2000 Sessions on new model at SACS Annual Meeting
- March 2001 Final Call for Comments
- April/May 2001 Task Force Meetings to review comments received and make revisions
- June 2001 Commission Meeting re Bylaws
- October 2001 Final Proposal to members
- December 2001 Vote on new model at SACS Annual Meeting
- 2002 First SACS letters to colleges up for renewal in 2004
- 2003 SACS Letters to colleges up for renewal in 2005
New process under construction, goes on website after December 2000 Meeting
Six Components of Accreditation
- Acceptable Improvement Report
- Compliance with Principles of Integrity
- Compliance with Core Requirements (12)
- Compliance with Comprehensive Requirements (60)
- Compliance with federal Title IV (Student Assistance) Requirements (6)
- Visiting committee of peers
Four distinct college documents
Expanded annual institutional profile
- Collect data year to year to monitor health of institution
- Examples: enrollment data, graduation rates
Certification of compliance
- Starts with SACS letter in year 8; due in September of year 9
- Administrative in nature, probably a small group prepares this
- Item by item statements re compliance with requirements
- Yes/no format with "why we say that" and "what we need to do to fix"
- Some documentation required
- To be signed by CEO and Accreditation Liaison
Portfolio of evidence (patterns of evidence)
- Copies or locations of all supporting documentation
- Some sent in, some for onsite
Improvement/Enhancement report
- Requires broad campus involvement
- Topic emerges from critical issues identified in college planning; can't be
- arbitrarily selected
- Similar to Alternative Model currently used
- Creates a blueprint of how to improve
- Viewed as 100 page document: 75 narrative, 25 appendices
Use of Documents by Commission
Peer review of each document submitted
3 layers of review:
- Offsite review with perhaps 10 like institutions reviewed together; produces a report which guides the on-site review of each and increases consistency of on-site review
- On-site review (changed from current model); produces visiting team report
- Commission of Colleges review of visiting team report plus college response
Additional points:
- Faculty credentials are listed as guidelines, not must statements
- Continuing education instructors and developmental faculty credentials are not prescribed
- Institutional effectiveness continues to be important; expectations continue to rise
- Expectations for IE can be met in many ways, less prescriptive than before
- Following a college's published policies is considered a matter of integrity
- Moving away from the term "self-study"
- The term "learning resources" has replaced "library"
- SACS concept of "mission" is broader than "purpose"