Get documents about "PowerPoint Presentation
Shared by: HC121002211420
-
Stats
- views:
- 0
- posted:
- 10/2/2012
- language:
- Unknown
- pages:
- 26
Document Sample
ELEMENTS OF AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAM
REVIEW FOR INTEGRATED PLANNING,
LEARNING OUTCOMES, AND
ASSESSMENT
Dr. Susan Clifford, Vice President
Mr. Jack Pond, Vice President
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges/WASC
Capacity Building for Educational Excellence through Program Review
and Integrated Institutional Planning
San Diego Mesa College
March 9, 2012
www.accjc.org 1 March 9, 2012
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Accreditation Basics
Commission requirements regarding program review
and integrated planning
An overview of the component parts of a viable
program review process
Concluding remarks
www.accjc.org 2 March 9, 2012
Accreditation Basics
www.accjc.org 3 March 9, 2012
THE PURPOSES OF ACCREDITATION ARE:
To provide assurance to the public that education
provided by institutions meets acceptable levels of quality
To promote continuous institutional improvement
To maintain the high quality of higher education
institutions in the region/nation
Continued
www.accjc.org 4 March 9, 2012
PURPOSES OF ACCREDITATION
Accreditation is the proven method for assuring that
higher education institutions can continue to improve and
offer a quality education to the men and women who will
lead their communities in the future. By establishing high
standards and then periodically evaluating themselves,
colleges and universities can provide a degree or
certificate that students and the community trust.
www.accjc.org 5 March 9, 2012
WHAT AUTHORITY DOES ACCJC HAVE TO IMPOSE
STANDARDS ON INSTITUTIONS?
The ACCJC and other regional accrediting bodies are authorized to
operate by the U.S. Department of Education through the Higher
Education Opportunity Act for periods of five years
Accreditation from a U.S. Department of Education-recognized
accreditor, such as the ACCJC, enables institutions to qualify for
federal Title IV funds and other federal grants and contracts
Accreditation is voluntary self regulation. Institutions voluntarily
agree to meet Accreditation Standards. They give the Commission
the requisite authority
www.accjc.org 6 March 9, 2012
Commission Requirements Regarding
Program Review and Integrated
Planning
www.accjc.org 7 March 9, 2012
COMMISSION REQUIREMENTS ON PROGRAM
REVIEW AND PLANNING
The Commission expects institutions to be at the
Sustainable Quality Improvement level in Program Review
of instructional and non-instructional programs and
services
The Commission expects institutions to be at the
Sustainable Quality Improvement level in Planning
Source: Commission Rubric of July 2011
www.accjc.org 8 March 9, 2012
COMMISSION REQUIREMENTS ON STUDENT
LEARNING OUTCOMES
The Commission expects institutions to now be at the
Development level or above in Student Learning
Outcomes, since these are the newest requirements
included in the Accreditation Standards
The Commission further expects institutions to be at
Proficiency level in the identification, assessment, and use
of improvements of student learning outcomes by Fall
2012
www.accjc.org 9 March 9, 2012
Elements of Effective
Program Review
www.accjc.org 10 March 9, 2012
Institutional Mission District Mission
and
Expectations
Programmatic
Mission
Outcomes
Design
Identify Program Inputs
Gaps Changes
Allocate
Needed
Process
Analysis of Resources
Outcomes Align
Implement Resources
Assessment
Program
www.accjc.org 11 March 9, 2012
OUTCOMES
Student Achievement Student Learning
www.accjc.org 12 March 9, 2012
DEVELOPMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
Course Level: Program Level: programmatic faculty in the
Discipline Faculty disciplines and external clients (employers,
transfer institutions, & the public)
Institutional Level:
Faculty, Academic Administrators
Trustees
Through the
Mission, Values, and
Commitment
www.accjc.org 13 March 9, 2012
Institutional Mission
Programmatic Mission
Outcomes
Design
Program
Identify
Changes Inputs
Gaps
Allocate
Needed
Resources Process
Analysis of
Outcomes
Assessment Implement Align
Program Resources
(or change)
www.accjc.org 14 March 9, 2012
Program Implementation
Scheduling and sequence of courses
Alignment with general education courses
www.accjc.org 15 March 9, 2012
Assessment
Gather meaningful student achievement data
Measure attainment of student learning outcomes
Data are qualitative and quantitative
Data are longitudinal where appropriate
Outcomes data are continually collected and analyzed
www.accjc.org 16 March 9, 2012
Analysis of Outcomes
Understanding the meaning of the data collected
• Judgments about what is good enough must be made
• Institutional and system governance groups
must be informed
Some colleges collect data through the
district/system; others collect data independently
www.accjc.org 17 March 9, 2012
Identify Gaps
Comparison of actual outcomes with intended
or targeted outcomes.
What worked to attain intended outcomes?
What part(s) of the program needs to be changed
to attain intended outcomes?
www.accjc.org 18 March 9, 2012
Design Program Changes
To program and course outcomes
To inputs and processes
To human, physical, technological
and financial resources
Programmatic changes must be in line with mission
Planned changes must inform the process
of budget allocation
System consultation is pivotal
www.accjc.org 19 March 9, 2012
(Re)Allocate Needed Resources
• Results of program review are clearly and
consistently linked to the institutional planning
and resource (re)allocation processes
• Constituent groups on campus are
involved in the decision-making processes
• Board Governance decisions reflect institutional
priorities identified through assessment
District/system support necessary to ensure that
program review leads to meaningful
improvements at the college
www.accjc.org 20 March 9, 2012
Reallocate Needed Resources
•Program review and planning inform/direct
resource reallocation
District/system support necessary
to ensure that program review leads
to meaningful improvements at the college
www.accjc.org 21 March 9, 2012
Institutional Mission
Programmatic Mission
Outcomes
Design
Program
Identify
Changes Inputs
Gaps
Allocate
Needed
Resources Process
Analysis of
Outcomes
Assessment Implement Align
Program Resources
(or change)
www.accjc.org 22 March 9, 2012
Concluding Remarks
www.accjc.org 23 March 9, 2012
THE SUSTAINABLE CONTINUOUS QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT LEVEL OF PROGRAM REVIEW
Program review processes are ongoing, systematic, and
used to assess and improve student learning and
achievement; the Board is informed of successes and
needed improvements
The institution reviews and refines the program review
process to improve institutional effectiveness
The results of program review are used to continually
refine and improve program practices resulting in
improvements in student achievement and learning
www.accjc.org 24 March 9, 2012
CULTURE AND PRACTICES OF ASSESSMENT
Institutional Commitment
Program review Planning and resource
Institutional effectiveness allocation
Information sharing Involvement and
Systemic assessment support from
President
planning Faculty
Common assessment Staff
terminology Information technology
Professional development Board support for CQI
www.accjc.org 25 March 9, 2012
THANK YOU
ACCJC/WASC
10 Commercial Blvd, Suite 204
Novato, CA 94949
Tel: 415-506-0234
Fax: 415-506-0238
Website: www.accjc.org
Email: accjc@accjc.org
www.accjc.org 26 March 9, 2012
