SACS Report to the President’s Council September 19, 2005

2004-05 in Review

2005-06 in Preview

Executive Summary: UTPA Reaffirmation of Accreditation

Project Campus progress toward completion is excellent CCT is a time-consuming process – we wish it could be faster QEP II is just beginning, and is “on track”

Campus participation in the project is excellent Campus awareness regarding the project is

excellent Campus improvements are in evidence as a

result of the project Campus financial expenditures regarding the

project are acceptable

Table of OrganizationThe Teams

Leadership

Blandina Cárdenas, CoChair Bill Turk, CoChair

(12 members)

Compliance Certification Quality Enhancement Susan Griffith, Chair Judy Davidson, Chair (25 members) (31 members, Phase I)

(102 affiliated) (16 members, Phase II)

SACS Public Web Site

SACS web site version shown to UTPA, http:/sacs.panam.edu.Will be open to the public September 9, 2006.

SACS Member Web Site

SACS web site after verification of username and password. Web Team: Isabel Infante, Xueyan Zhao, Clifford Moon, Russell Dove.

The Leadership Team – Apex of Triangle

Review: Leadership Team Short Answer: A Steering Committee

Coordinates Manages, Administers, Conducts Oversees, Supervise Ensures, Insures, Guarantees

The Final Decision-maker

I have asked all members to be present today.

Leadership Team – Membership

Certificate of ComplianceReview: Compliance Team

An Audit Committee Focused on Past and Present

15 Core Requirements 53 Comprehensive Standards 8 Federal Requirements

Narrative and Documentation for each Many are multi-part statements

Our Burden is to PROVE: Full-Compliance, (Partial) or Non

Compliance Certification Team Members

Compliance Certification Team Members

Compliance Certification Sub-Team Members

Core Requirement Document

Process for Creating each (76) Principle1. Each of the 25+ members of CCT have “volunteered” for

one or more requirement/standard.2. Members draft responses based on their expertise and a

review of what other schools have done. Draft is presented to CCT by reading aloud. Multiple Appearances!

3. Review by Margaret Sullivan.4. Rewritten/revised as per Dr. Sullivan.5. Revision and/or Approval by CCT.6. Presentation to Leadership. Revision or Approval7. Send to CCT editor.8. Post on web site.

Review: Quality Enhancement Plan

A (Future) Plan to Improve Student Learning

“The QEP describes a carefully designed and focused course of action that addresses a well-defined topic or issue(s) related to enhancing student learning.” Handbook, p. 21

SACS will return in 5 years to assess QEP.

Quality Enhancement

Plan U.T.P.A. Topic (review – QEP Phase I)

GEAR UP to Graduate: A Model for Academic Success for First-Generation Mexican American University Students

Preview [QEP Phase II]Grant Proposal Question: What interventions/initiatives for this

population could/should be instituted/implemented to improve student learning?

Grant Design: Control Groups and an Experimental Group

Quality Enhancement Team, Phase I

Quality Enhancement Team, Phase I

Quality Enhancement I, Sub-Team

Quality Enhancement Team, Phase II

Preview: The time-frame Comp. Cert. Report Due Sept. 8, 2006 Dr. Gerald Lord at UTPA Sept. 25-26, 2006 Off-Site Peer Review Nov. 6-8, 2006

Focus Report (begin) Nov. 10, 2006

UTPA is in the Class of ‘07

QEP Plan Due March 6, 2007 Focus Report Due March 6, 2007 Audited Financial Stmt Due March 6, 2007 On-Site Peer Review (6 peer, 1 staff) April 17-19, 2007 Response Report Due Sept. 18-20, 2007 UTPA’s accreditation approved Dec. 7-11, 2007

QEP Impact Report Due March 6, 2012

Review & Preview of Costs

UTPA* UT El Paso*

1st Year $67,766 $140,000 (6 mo) [$7,234 under budget]

2nd Year $180,000 $280,000

3rd Year $200,000 $280,000

Totals $444,000 $700,000[37% under UTEP]

* Except for our first year, these numbers are estimates only. UTEP estimates include work-time on SACS.

UTPA Improvements as a Result of

SACS (in addition to QEP) Faculty Credentials University-wide Planning and Assessment Center for Teaching Effectiveness (suggested) 25% of SCHs awarded Business Continuity Plan updated Learning outcomes in ALL course syllabi Drug/Alcohol awareness for faculty and staff

(suggested) HR codes for academic departments updated

Thank You!

And now

Your Questions?