You’re Reaccredited, Now What??

Maximizing the Process for Institutional

Improvement

December 7, 2017

Joanne Coté-Bonanno, Montclair State University

Christine Licata, Rochester Institute of Technology

Cheryl Littman, Queens College, CUNY

Presentation Overview

Institutional Experiences

▪ Accreditation and the Seven Standards

▪ Self-Study – What we would do differently

▪ Outcomes – Institutional Assessment Data

▪ Now What? Action Plans for Continuous Improvement

▪ Strategic Planning Priorities

Accreditation and the

Seven Standards

The Standards

Montclair State University

Gathering Information by Standards

Rochester Institute of Technology

Documentation Roadmap (Evidence Inventory)

Queens College, CUNY

The Seven Standards

A Higher Education Institution:

has a mission (Standard I)

and lives it with integrity (Standard II)

to enhance the student learning experience (Standard III)

and support the overall student experience (Standard IV)

and that Institution:

assesses its success in achieving that mission (Standard V)

and engages in planning to strengthen its resources and improve as an institution (Standard VI)

by means of an effective governing process (Standard VII)

Dr. David B. Rehm –MSCHE Commissioner

Gathering information by Standard and Criteria

STANDARD I: Mission and Goals

The institution's mission defines its purpose within the context of higher

education, the students it serves, and what it intends to accomplish. The

institution's stated goals are clearly linked to its mission and specify

how the institution fulfills its mission.

Assemble the following, as appropriate:

▪ Statements regarding institutional mission and goals

▪ Processes and procedures relevant to mission and goal

Standard I Criteria Supporting Documents or Links Related Processes and Procedures People Library

Clearly defined mission and goals that:

a. are developed through appropriate collaborative participation by all who facilitate or are otherwise responsible for institutional development and improvement

1. Taskforce Reports

2. Strategic Plan Wiki

3. President’s website

1. Campus review process for developing

mission and goals

2. Steering Committee processes

3. Taskforce processes

4. P04.0: Core Values

5. A01.0: History, Accreditation and Legacy

6. A02.0: Key Result Areas and Goals

7. E02.2: Principles of Academic Freedom

1. Kit Mayberry

2. Karen Barrows

3. Strategic Plan Steering

Committee

4. Academic Senate Chair

5. Staff Council Chair

6. Student Government President

7. Bob Finnerty

8. Chair of the Board of Trustees

a. address external as well as internal contexts and constituencies

1. RIT’s Strategic Plan 2005-15

2. RIT’s new Strategic Plan: Greatness

Through Difference 2015-25

3. Alumni

a. are approved and supported by the governing body

1. Senate minutes for debate on

adoption of Strategic Plan

2. Board of Trustees’ Presentation on

Strategic Plan

a. guide faculty, administration, staff, and governing structures in making decisions related to planning, resource allocation, program and curricular development, and the definition of institutional and educational outcomes

1. Institutional Priority List for Strategic

Plan and Funding Strategy

• Essential Learning Outcomes

Document

• Academic Blueprint Portfolio

Getting Organized: The Documentation Roadmap

Prior to Self-Study:

▪ Define, operationalize and give examples of Evidence

▪ Not always self-evident, encourage explicit connections between

standard and evidence

▪ Create Documentation Roadmap and Repository/Database

▪ Identify/Brainstorm list of documents, existing and to be created

▪ Curate

▪ Identify specific sections of large documents

▪ Map documents to standard and strategic plan goals

▪ Include document expiration dates

Getting Organized: The Documentation Roadmap

During Self-Study:

▪ Continue to curate documents, add newly created documents

▪ Look for redundancies

▪ Communicate and consult periodically, share documents

across working groups

After Reaffirmation:

▪ Align recommendations/suggestions from with Strategic goals

and initiatives already underway

▪ Plan for document updates as needed

▪ Use the Documentation Roadmap as a Living Document

Self-Study

What would we do differently?

▪ Working Groups

▪ Charge

▪ Structure

▪ Calendar and meetings

Working Groups –

Recommendations

▪ Clear, written charge, and reminders of the charge

▪ Problem solvers, not just problem identifiers

▪ Clarify roles within groups

▪ Meeting/work calendar with clear deadlines for deliverables

▪ Set clear expectations for deliverables

▪ Roadmap

▪ Outline

▪ Early draft

▪ Revised draft

▪ Templates and examples

▪ Establish mechanisms for periodic cross-group communication

▪ Establish mechanisms for feedback on deliverables

▪ Recognize areas of overlap and redundancy

Mid-Progress Report: Overall Standard Status - Example

Standard I Created with: TaskstreamParticipating Area: MSCHE Self-StudyMid-Progress Report: Overall Standard StatusStandard I: Mission and GoalsStatus Date:

1. Identify any specific criteria within the Standard that have been difficult for your group to determine if RIT is meeting the expectations as set forth by Middle States.

2. What concerns, if any, do you have about the data/evidence available to yourWorking Group to demonstrate that RIT is meeting the criteria for your Standard?

3. Please list any additional information or resources the Working Group would like to add to the Documentation Roadmap.

4. Describe any recommendations your Working Group is considering at this point in the process.

Mid-Progress Report: Overall Standard Status - Continued

5. Describe any collaborations that your Working Group has been engaged

in or are planning for in the future with other Working Groups.

6. Detail progress to date on responding to the following Research Questions:

RESEARCH QUESTION 1: How effective is RIT, as a "student-centric"

university, at preparing graduates for successful careers in a global society?

(Linked to Strategic Plan 2015 Mission and Dimension One: Career Education and

Student Success- Difference Maker I.2)

RESEARCH QUESTION 2: To what extent do opportunities exist to enhance

collaborative and interdisciplinary academic programs, research, and

partnerships across the University?

(Linked to Strategic Plan 2015 and Mission and Dimension Two:

The Student-Centered Research University - Difference Maker II.1)

Template for a Working Group Report

▪ An overview of the group’s charge and the questions it addressed

▪ An analytical discussion of the inquiry undertaken and the outcomes of

that inquiry, including strengths and challenges

▪ An explanation of how the group’s findings and conclusions relate to the

Commission’s standards

▪ Discussion of the connection of the group’s topic with those of other

groups, and of any collaboration between groups that took place

▪ Recommendations for improvement

MSCHE Standard Number: Reviewer Name:

Review/Element Met

Meaningful analysis, clear and

concise supporting evidence,

reflective, included conclusions,

linkages where relevant, and

recommendations.

Needs Improvement

On one or more of the following

areas: Overly descriptive, focused

on describing what the institution

does without analysis of

information, made unsupported

assertions, used confusing or

conflicting data, not clear on

conclusions, or recommendations

Missing

(Unable to determine or missing

core element of report – identify)

An overview of the group’s charge,

defining the scope of its tasks and

responsibilities in relation to its assigned

Standard for Accreditation

Analytical discussion of the inquiry

undertaken and data (evidence)

reviewed

Conclusions regarding strengths

Conclusions regarding challenges

Explanation of how the group’s

conclusions relate to the assigned

Standard for Accreditation

Recommendations for ongoing

institutional improvement

Comments:

Working Group Template

▪ Standard #: Standard Title (limit to 10 pages) - The Standard statement

▪

▪ Satisfactorily met the standard and criteria - Brief Statement

▪ Introduction – Restatement of the standard that is specific to MSU

▪ Analysis of key issues related to meeting the standard and criteria

▪ Identify and discuss any noted areas of innovation in relation to this

standard.

▪ Summary Statement

Outcomes – Institutional Assessment Data

▪ Data infrastructure

▪ Enhancing data accessibility

▪ Data distribution

▪ Academic Affairs and Institutional Research

Collaboration

▪ Documentation Roadmap ( Evidence Inventory )

Outcomes - Institutional

Assessment Data

▪ Involve Institutional Research/Effectiveness early and often

▪ Mapping data resources and metrics to standards

▪ Identify needs/gaps up front

▪ Trend data may be more useful than snapshots

▪ Incorporate benchmark data if possible

▪ Align with assessment of strategic plan goals

▪ Build data and report infrastructure with

assessment in mind

▪ Accessible

▪ Updateable

▪ Interactive, “self-service”

Outcomes - Institutional

Assessment Data

▪ Provide professional development for data consumers

▪ Conduct meta assessment

▪ Organize processes and data for institutional improvement

post-accreditation

▪ Not just the IR office (leadership, faculty)

▪ Strategic planning implementation efforts

▪ Presentations at regular meetings –

including at meetings with faculty

What is the Assessment of Student Learning?

1. Developing clearly articulated learning

outcomes for successful completion of:

▪ Courses

▪ Academic Programs

▪ Co-curricular Programs

▪ General Education requirements19

Assessment of Student Learning

2. Offering courses, programs and experiences that

provide purposeful opportunities of student to achieve

those learning outcomes.

3. Assessing student achievement for those learning

outcomes

4. Using the results to improve teaching and learning and

inform planning and resource allocation decisions.

20

What is the Assessment of Institutional Effectiveness?

▪ Defining clearly articulated institutional and unit-level

goals

▪ Implementing strategies to achieve those goals

▪ Implementing strategies to achieve those goals

▪ Using the results of those assessments to

▪ improve programs and services

▪ inform planning and resource allocation

21

Now What? Action Plans for

Continuous Improvement

▪ Strategic Planning Priorities

▪ Institutional Stakeholders

▪ New and Ongoing Challenges

22

Research Questions Aligned to Strategic PrioritiesResearch

Questions

Aligned to 15

Strategic Plan

Priorities &

MSCHE

Standards

Standard I

Mission and Goals

Standard II

Ethics and

Integrity

Standard III

Deign and

Delivery of the

Student Learning

Experience

Standard IV

Support for the

Student

Experience

Standard V

Educational

Effectiveness

Assessment

Standard VI

Planning,

Resources, and

Institutional

Improvement

Standard VII

Governance,

Leadership, and

Administration

RESEARCH

QUESTION 2

To what extent do

opportunities exist

to enhance

collaborative and

interdisciplinary

academic

programs,

research, and

partnerships

across the

University?

To what degree

is RIT positioned

to satisfy the

“Affordability

goal?”

Where do

opportunities

exist to expand

and strengthen

experiential

learning

experiences for

all students?

To what extent

are the

University’s

recruitment and

retention efforts,

and planned

efforts meeting

institutional

enrollment

goals?

To what extent

does RIT use

assessment

results for the

improvement of

educational

effectiveness

consistent with

the mission?

To what extent

does RIT

leverage

educational

technology to

improve access,

maintain

academic quality

and achieve

desired learning

outcomes while

balancing costs?

Is RIT’s system

of shared

governance

working

effectively to

benefit

constituencies

that it serves?

STRATEGIC

PLAN

PRIORITIES

Dimension One: Career Education and Student Success

Difference Maker I.2“Interdisciplinarity”Dimension Two: The Student-centered University

Difference Maker II.1“Signature Research Areas”II.4 “Sponsored Research”

Dimension

Four:

Affordability and

Return on

Investment

Difference

Maker IV.1 Best

Placement Rate”

Difference

Maker IV.3

“Financial Needs”

Dimension One:

Education and

Student Success

Difference

Maker I.4

“Graduate

Education”

Difference

Maker I.5

“Experiential

Learning”

Dimension Two:

The Student-

Centered

University

Difference

Maker I.4

“”Graduate

Education”

Difference

Maker I.7

“on-Time

Graduation”

Difference Make

III.5

“Largest

Dimension One:

Education and

Student Success

Difference

Maker I.4

“Outcomes-

based

Assessment

Model”

Dimension

Four:

Affordability

Difference

Maker IV.1

“Best Placement

Rate”

Difference

Maker IV.2

“Improve Access

and Balance

Costs” 23

Charge

This university-level committee supports the review and monitoring of its accreditation through the Middle States

Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE). The committee will ensure the Commission's standards and policies are

incorporated into the ongoing planning and evaluation processes of the institution. They will provide oversight for

Implementing RIT's Self Study Report Recommendations and MSCHE report recommendations and the tracking and

reporting of annual progress on those recommendations. Members on this committee serve as liaisons to their

respective divisions and constituency groups.

ACCREDITATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (AOC)

Purpose

1. Ensure accountability through the requirement of documented annual progress reports from those

responsible for carrying out campus initiatives and responses to accreditation recommendations.

2. Review and discuss ongoing requirements for RIT's regional accreditor, MSCHE, to facilitate keeping in

compliance with the Requirements of Affiliation, standards, and Commission policies.

3. Review alignment of university processes and policies with Accreditation Standards and federal

requirements.

4. Review the MSCHE Annual Institutional Report.

• Assistant Vice President for Compliance & Ethics and Deputy General Counsel

• Chief Communications Officer

• Assistant Vice President for Institutional Research and Policy Studies

• Interim Vice President & Associate Provost for Diversity & Inclusion

• Senior Vice President for Student Affairs

• Assistant Vice President for Budget & Financial Planning Services

• Senior Associate Provost for Academic Affairs

• Assistant Vice President for Enrollment Management

• Associate Provost International Programs and Global Education

• Assistant Vice President for Operations, Academic Affairs

• Assistant Provost for Assessment and Accreditation, RIT's Accreditation Liaison Officer (ALO) and Convener

• Chair of Academic Senate

Members

ACCREDITATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (AOC)

Strategic Planning Priorities

Standard I - example

▪ Summary - 3 key findings

▪ Clearly defined Mission and Goals

▪ New Initiatives as an outgrowth of Strategic Plan

▪ Initiatives are supported by institutional resources

▪ Next Steps for Strategic Planning

▪ Reassessing Mission

▪ Committee on University Effectiveness (CUE) – distribute,

discuss and evaluate yearly reports

▪ Carefully weigh the doctoral designation in identifying new

Institutional Benchmarks26

Where are we now?

▪ Aligned self-study recommendations and MSCHE suggestions with strategic plan goals

▪ Conducted a strategic plan retreat

▪ Assess progress toward 2020 targets

▪ Identify priorities for the coming year

▪ Consulted and communicated with stakeholders

▪ Students

▪ Faculty/Chairs/P&B

▪ College leadership

▪ Administrators

▪ Staff

▪ System Office

▪ Identified strategic plan priorities for the year

▪ Aligning with System (CUNY-wide) priorities

▪ Forming 2017-18 working groups to advance, monitor and report on strategic goals27

Examples and Templates

▪ Template for aligning MSCHE suggestions with strategic

goals

▪ Self-study recommendations – implementation plan

(completed template)

▪ Annual Calendar for strategic plan assessment

28

New and Ongoing Challenges

▪ Keeping stakeholders engaged in the process

▪ Leaders

▪ Faculty

▪ Students

▪ Administrative staff

▪ Professional development

▪ Identifying and investing resources for assessment and data/reporting

infrastructure

▪ Conducting Meta assessment – developing new pathways for providing

feedback to those conducting assessment and working on strategic

priorities

▪ Sustainability

▪ New University-wide Strategic Framework and an institutional review

process undergoing change

29

The Team Visit

▪ Meeting Preparation

▪ Roles and Responsibilities

▪ Logistics

30

Meeting Preparation

In preparation for the visit, we have developed a Meeting Schedule for each team member. You are receiving this

information because a meeting is scheduled for you to meet with one or more of the team members. Please

remember that the accreditation process is intended to foster institutional improvement. Therefore, conversations

during the visit may be both self-critical and self-congratulatory, as appropriate and deserved.

In order to prepare for your meeting:

• Please read the Self-Study Report with a particular focus on the Standards of Accreditation which relate to your meeting topic with

the team member(s).

• Please review RIT’s Recommendations and Suggestions (themed in the Executive Summary and also in the addendum at the end of

the Self-Study Report)

• Please review the Greatness Through Difference Crosswalk of RIT’s 15 (early implementation) strategic priorities integrated within

the Self-Study Report.

• Be prepared to cite evidence to support the information presented in the Self-Study Report and/or to support your responses to

questions posed by team members.

• Be prepared to discuss your role in meeting the Standard(s) and your involvement, if any, in the preparation of the Self-Study

Report.

If you would like more information, please visit RIT’s MSCHE Accreditation Website.

RIT’s Campus Briefing Memo

MSCHE Reaccreditation Decennial Evaluation: Team Visit April 2-5, 2017

Guidance by Area: Roles and Responsibilities

Evaluation teams typically meet with specific individuals who are closely connected to the specific Standards and

associated criteria. The following guidance was designed to help those in specific areas or roles prepare for their

meetings.

General Information: The Evaluation Visit is a comprehensive overview of the entire university. Expect to be

questioned about the section(s) of the Self-Study Report relevant to your area and larger issues as well.

Possible Questions:

• Is the Self-Study Report truthful?

• Does it represent the situation at RIT accurately?

• What did the campus learn from this inquiry? What themes emerged?

• Are RIT’s 14 Recommendations and 13 Suggestions beneficial to the campus?

• Are there any Recommendations or Suggestions that you think are missing?

• How does the Self-Study Report support RIT’s Strategic Plan?

• What are RIT’s strengths? What are RIT’s weaknesses?

• Did you have any input into the Self-Study Report?

• Are RIT's plans for the future reasonable and attainable?

• How do you (or your unit) help fulfill the mission of the university?

RIT’s Campus Briefing Memo

MSCHE Reaccreditation Decennial Evaluation: Team Visit April 2-5, 2017

Guidance by Area: Roles and Responsibilities Examples

Academic Deans: In addition to reading the Self-Study Report, please be ready to talk generally about your college, especially current

and future plans for assessment, program strengths, and plans for your unit which supports RIT’s Strategic Plan. Review the themes

(Executive Summary) and associated recommendations and suggestions. Standards of Note: Standards III: Design of the Student Learning

Experience IV: Support of the Student Learning Experience, V: Educational Effectiveness Assessment, and VI: Planning, Resources, and

Institutional Improvement.

Academic Senate: In addition to reading the Self-Study Report, Standard III: Design of the Student Learning Experience focuses on student

learning and faculty. Please review Standard VIII Governance. Be prepared to answer questions about faculty life at RIT. Review the

themes (Executive Summary) and associated recommendations and suggestions.

Students: In addition to reading the Self-Study Report, be ready to answer questions about your experience here, your satisfaction or

dissatisfaction. Standards of Note: III: Design of the Student Learning Experience and IV: Support of the Student Learning Experience.

Review the themes (Executive Summary) and associated recommendations and suggestions.

Trustees: In addition to reading and being familiar with the Self-Study Report, please be ready to discuss your satisfaction with

trusteeship, views on progress of RIT toward its mission and goals. Be prepared to discuss the Strategic Plan and its implementation.

Review the themes (Executive Summary) and associated recommendations and suggestions. Standards of Note: I: Mission and Goals, VI:

Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement, and VII: Governance, Leadership, and Administration.

RIT’s Campus Briefing Memo

MSCHE Reaccreditation Decennial Evaluation: Team Visit April 2-5, 2017

Talking to a Middle States Evaluator

• Vocabulary and Acronyms – Glossary – RIT and MSU

• Process and Content

• Next Steps for Strategic Planning

• Recommendations/Suggestions

34

35

Dr. Morales

Team Chair

Dr. Sanyal

Standards I and II

Col. Kobylski Standards I,

V, VI and VII

Mr. Sheehan

StandrdsII and VI

Dr. Hodes Standards III and

IV

Dr. Turner Standards III and

IV

Dr. Chandler Standards

V and VII

7:45 AM

8:30 AM

Director OIR 514 Vice President SDCL 550 Vice President SDCL 550 Director OIR 514

9:00 AM President Cole

Provost

Working Group I 510 Working Group VII 570 CFO / Internal Auditor

Grad Lounge

Dean’s Councii 290 Dean's Council 290 Working Group VII 570

9:35 AM

10:00 AM President, Provost and Executive

Council President's Conference

Room

President, Provost and

Executive Council President's

Conference Room

President, Provost and

Executive Council

President's Conference

Room

Department Chairs140 Associate Provost for

Undergraduate Education,

Academic Affairs, Associate Vice

President for Student Academic

Services, Student Development

and Campus Life 510

Assistant Director of

Assessment, Academic

Affairs,

Assistant Director of

Institutional Effectiveness,

Research Analysis,

Institutional Research,

Assessment Database

Administrator, Institutional

Research51410:35 AM

11:00 AM Director of Undergraduate

Admissions,

Dean of the Graduate

SchoolAssociate Director, the

Graduate School 510

Senate Executive Board290 VP Human Resources

Director of Equal

Opportunity, Affirmative

Action and Diversity

514

Representatives of the Faculty -

Research 11:00 am and

Teaching Grad

Lounge11:30 am 570

Director of Undergraduate

Admissions,

Executive Director for the

Graduate School and Graduate

Operations, Graduate School,

510

Senate Executive Board 290

11:35 AM Representatives of the

Student Government

Association (SGA) 290

Representatives of the

Student Government

Association (SGA) 290

12:00 PM

Pick up at hotel to transport to Campus

Campus Tour

Monday 4.3.17Team Schedule

Links ▪ Accreditation and the Seven Standards

▪ Gathering Information by Standard/Criteria

▪ RIT Documentation Road Map

▪ RIT Glossary

▪ RIT Self Study Mid Progress Report

▪ RIT Working Group Report Review

▪ Self Study – What We Would Do Differently

▪ Outcomes – Institutional Assessment Data

▪ Now What? Action Plans for Continuous Improvement

▪ Strategic Planning Priorities

▪ RIT Research Questions Aligned to Strategic Plan Priorities and MSCHE Standards

▪ RIT Research Questions

▪ Institutional Stakeholders

▪ RIT Accreditation Oversight Committee

▪ RIT Campus Debrief (following Team Visit)

▪ New and Ongoing Challenges

▪ The Team Visit

▪ General Information Provided to RIT Campus

▪ Information Provided to Groups on Team Schedule

▪ Sample Invitations to Students and Faculty36

Links ▪ Accreditation and the Seven Standards

▪ Gathering Information by Standard/Criteria

▪ Guidelines for Completing the Documentation Roadmap

▪ Self Study – What We Would Do Differently

▪ Working Group Template

▪ Self-Study Rubric

▪ Writing an Evidentiary Statement

▪ Outcomes – Institutional Assessment Data

▪ Examples of Assessment Plan

▪ Table of Program Assessment

▪ Use of Assessment Results

▪ Now What? Action Plans for Continuous Improvement

▪ Strategic Planning Priorities

▪ Institutional Stakeholders

▪ Self-Study Stakeholders

▪ New and Ongoing Challenges

▪ The Team Visit

▪ What does accreditation mean to MSU

▪ Middle States Team is Coming

▪ Glossary37