Follow-up without Judith Eaton
Joseph Bielanski, Berkeley CollegeMarie Boyd, Chaffey CollegeJulie Bruno, Sierra CollegeRich Hansen, De Anza CollegeRichard Mahon, Riverside CollegeWith a special appearance by Jane Patton
Check In
What brings you to this breakout? What is happening in regards to accreditation
on your campus? What questions can we possibly answer?
Accreditation and the Future
What should accreditation be about? Quality assurance Quality improvement Institutional Autonomy Academic Freedom Peer and professional review
Accreditation and the Future
What it has become? Gatekeeper for federal financial aid Gatekeeper for federal regulations National Advisory Committee on Institutional
Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) Accountability and compliance 2008: 110 new rules 2009: 29 new rules
Accreditation and the Future
What has it become? 2010: focus on credit hour, distance education,
state authorization, gainful employment, policy on intellectual disabilities
The Higher Education Act renewed in 2013. The political role accreditation plays
Consultation Council Accreditation Task Force Recommendations1. Provide means for periodic feedback to ACCJC
on accreditation processes and college experiences.
2. Strengthen standards-based training via joint conferences and trainings, including best practices.
3. Review the ACCJC visiting-team selection process, widen cross-section of team members, and provide professional development opportunities.
4. Scale accreditation expectations to benchmarks of best practices documented in other accrediting regions.
5. Consider lengthening the cycle of accreditation to 8 -10 years.
6. Focus on improvement rather than compliance and develop non-public communication to campuses regarding improvements needed.
7. Avoid recommendations that encroach on negotiable issues.
Consultation Council Accreditation Task Force Recommendations
Some steps being taken by ACCJC: Two recent newsletters:
“Twelve Common Questions and Answers about Regional Accreditation” (2/11)
“The Future of Accreditation” (Spring ’11) Sessions and trainings at conferences: CCLC,
CIO, Academic Resource, Strengthening Student Success, Meetings at the State Chancellor’s Office
Holding two regional workshops every half year until 2012
Some steps being taken by ACCJC: Encouraging involvement with the Western
Cooperative for Educational Technologies (Distance Education)
Revising and updating various accreditation manuals
In 2012 will begin the review of the current Standards (10 years cycle)
RP Group Accreditation ResearchGoals of the Study
Gather and disseminate information about accreditation practices and processes across the US
Create new opportunities for discussion about the utility of accreditation
RP Group Accreditation Research Reviewed 3 Accreditation Agencies
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS)
North Central Association of Colleges and Schools – Higher Learning Commission (NCA-HLC)
Western Association of Schools and Colleges - Accreditation Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC)
RP Group Accreditation Research Reviewed websites and key documents Interviewed Commission representatives Interviewed representatives from colleges
within the three regions
Setting the Stage for Quality Improvement Findings
Shifting the focus to quality enhancement requires a reinvention of the accreditation process
Three commissions are on a continuum of integration of quality enhancement into accreditation process
Developing a relationship between the Commission and CollegesFindings
Transparent, open and honest opportunities for feedback without fear of retribution are critical to the relationship between a commission and member colleges
When a commission demonstrates that it takes into account colleges’ feedback, institutions feel heard and a valued part of the process
Supporting Colleges in Achieving ReaffirmationFindings
Training constituents involved in reaffirmation
A training program that is comprehensive, learner-centered, inclusive and integral to the accreditation process is most useful to institutions
Positive learning occurs when serving on a visiting team
Supporting Colleges in Achieving ReaffirmationFindings
Sharing effective practices Formal and informal networks created by the colleges
themselves are particularly effective in offering peer guidance and specific “nuts and bolts” information
Formal and informal networks created by the colleges themselves are particularly effective in offering peer guidance and specific “nuts and bolts” information
Helping institutions interpret and meet standards Institutions need practical, specific and direct guidance
on how to understand and achieve standards.
Consistently Applying Standards and Effectively Using Sanctions FindingsEnsuring consistent application of standards during review process and status recommendations Commissions promote integrity in the assessment of colleges when they implement a multi-layered, transparent review process
Holding all institutions of higher education to the same standardsHolding community colleges to the same standards as their baccalaureate-granting counterparts can promote consistency in culture, quality and expectations for students
Consistently Applying Standards and Effectively Using Sanctions Findings
Implementing sanctions Sanctions can motivate positive action, but how
and when a commission applies a sanction can influence a college’s response
Generating a positive return on investmentFindings
Commissions engender a positive return on a college’s investment when they demonstrate theoretically and practically that they value quality rather than quantity throughout the review process
RP Group
Focusing Accreditation on Quality Improvement: Findings from an Exploration of Community College Accreditation Policies and Practices
Responses from the FieldAmending Standards and Processes Emphasize quality and improvement through: The standards, self-study and accreditation visit focus more on
teaching, learning and student success and less on internal systems A consortium of colleges that actively works to meet a set of quality
standards that go beyond the accreditation standards
Recognition of the limited capacities of colleges to continuously address the current accreditation workload as exhibited through:
A set of simplified standards that evaluate quality with minimum redundancy
A more streamlined system for self-studies, reports to the commission and college visits
Responses from the FieldGreater participation of the public A community college trustee assigned to every visiting
team to represent the public
Responses from the Field Strengthening Practitioner Training/Support Stronger understanding of accreditation
processes/effective practices A commission staff person or member of the commission
assigned to every visiting team Learner-centered training programs for college faculty
and staff Regional venues for colleges to share promising
practices related to the accreditation standards
Responses from the Field Strengthening Practitioner Training/Support Colleges facing sanctions or on sanction could better
meet or exceed the accreditation standard minimum with:
Pre-visit technical support
Post-visit technical support
Responses from the Field Collaborating with Constituency Groups and Accrediting Agencies
ACCJC-approved training and collaboration Academic Senate for California Community Officers California Community Colleges Chief Instructional Officers
Expanding collaboration with WASC Senior
Increasing dues to hire more commission staff provide additional outreach support training
What’s Next?
Implications?
Resolutions?
Next Steps?
Q & Awith Jane
Resources
Accreditation and the Federal Future of Higher Education, Academe Online, Judith Eaton
Federalization of Higher Education and the Expanding Data Bubble, Rostrum, Dec 2010
RP Group Discussing Accreditation: Findings, Discussion Questions and Report Back from the Field on Community Colleges Accreditation Policies and Practices
RP Group Focusing Accreditation on Quality Improvement: Findings from an Exploration of Community College Accreditation Policies and Practices
Thank You!
Top Related