AQIP Academic Quality Improvement Program by happo4


									AQIP: Academic Quality Improvement
Higher Learning Commission-NCA
    Lynette Olson, Office of the Chancellor,
   Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
Presentation Objectives
   Review Value of Accreditation
   Describe Continuous Quality Improvement
    Approach to Accreditation
   Compare AQIP and PEAQ (traditional
   Impact for Minnesota State Colleges &
   Identify needs for further
Regional Accreditation
   Associations of peer institutions that provide
    assurance to the public that institutions have
    met agency’s requirements and criteria and
    that there are reasonable grounds to believe
    it will continue to do so.
   NCA—North Central Association of Colleges
    and Schools; North Central region--19 states, 6 regions
   HLC--Higher Learning Commission, division of
What is the Value of
    Board of Trustees requirement for each
     Minnesota State College and University
    Standard of quality
    Incentive for self improvement
    Basis for decisions on transferability of credits
    Required for students to access financial aid
     (Reauthorization Act, 2004)
HLC/NCA Mission: Serving the
common good by assuring and
advancing quality

HLC/NCA Values      Future Oriented
 Four Themes:
                    Learning Focused
                    Connected
                    Distinctive Organization
Four Themes Valued
   Future Oriented Organization
       Engages in planning
       Driven by mission
       Understands change
   Learning Focused Organization
       Assessment of learning
       Supports learning
       Creates capacity for learning
Four Themes Valued (Cont.)
   Connected Organization
       Serves the common good
       Creates a culture of service
       Collaborative/Partnerships
   Distinctive Organization
       Mission driven
       Welcomes accountability
HLC Strategic Priorities
1.   Increase focus of accreditation on Quality of
     higher learning
2.   Multiple accreditation processes (e.g. AQIP),
     emphasis on institutions own processes of Quality
     Assurance, Quality Improvement, accreditation
     based on integrity of processes and results.
3.   Expand HLC services to assure/advance Quality
     in higher learning
4.   Share effective practices to promote Quality in
     higher learning
PEAQ (Program to Evaluate &
Advance Quality)
    New Criteria
    1.   Mission and Integrity
          Organization operates with integrity to ensure the fulfillment of its mission
    2.   Preparing for the Future
          Allocation of resources & planning are demonstrated – to fulfill its mission
    3.   Student Learning, Effective Teaching
          Organization provides evidence of student achievement & teaching effectiveness
             to fulfill its mission
    4.   Acquiring, Creating, Applying Knowledge
          Organization promotes a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff and
             students. Social responsibility is consist with mission
    5.   Engagement and Service
          Organization identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways both value
             according to the mission
    Report on Operational Indicators
PEAQ – Program to Evaluate &
Advance Quality
   Self-study
       Criteria
   Onsite visit-consultant-evaluators
   Review Panel or Reader’s Review
   Commission acts on
    accreditation/reaccredidation for 5-10 years
   Institution may have a requirement for a
    focus visit or progress report
PEAQ Institutions
   Winona State University              Fondu Lac CC
   Bemidji State University             Itasca CC
   Mn West Community and Technical      Mesabi Range CC
    College                              Vermillion CC
   Central Lakes College                Hibbing CC
   St Paul College                      Normandale CC
   St Cloud State University            North Hennepin CC
   Southwest State University           Pine Technical College
   Anoka Ramsey CC                      Mn State Community & Technical
   Anoka-Hennepin TC                     College
   Century Community & Technical        Northland Community & Technical
    College                               College
   Dakota County TC                     South Central Technical College
   Minnesota State University,          Minnesota State University
    Mankato                               Moorhead
AQIP Members (
 •   Alexandria Technical    •   Rochester Community &
     College                     Technical College
 •   Lake Superior College   •   Ridgewater College
 •   St. Cloud Technical     •   Hennepin Technical
                             •   Inver Hills Community
 •   Rainy River College         College
 •   Northwest Technical     •   Minneapolis Technical &
     College – Bemidji           Community College
     Campus                  •   Metro State University
 •   Riverland Community     •   Minnesota State College
     College                     – Southeast Technical
An Institutional Choice
   Reasons for PEAQ                     Reasons for AQIP
       Initial accreditation                Institutional Reasons
       Probation                              Culture for change

       Institutional reasons                  Strategic planning initiatives
           Wish to establish                  Involvement with CQI
            traditional credibility             initiatives
           Cultural                                 Baldrige
           Buy in                                   CQIN
           Financial resources
                                                     Minnesota Quality Award
           Governance change
                                                 Credibility outside education
           Leadership change                    Providing CQI training CT/CE
           Mission
                                                 Leadership
What Makes AQIP Different from
PEAQ (Traditional Re-accreditation)
   Focuses on themes, patterns and processes
    across the institution
       Visioning for the future
       Empowers faculty and staff--Conversation Days
       Supports engaging and developing peoples talents – team
A Continuous Improvement Process
   Focuses on Results – Not procedures or
    organizational structure
   Goal Orientated – Encourages flexible
   Common Vision – Fosters understanding and
   Aligns all Resources – Supports innovation &
AQIP Framework:
     Nine Criteria
     Ten Values/Principles
ASKS…. What Do You Do and How?
   Are you doing the right things – that are most
    important in order to achieve your mission and goals?
   Are you doing those things well – effectively,
    efficiently, in ways that satisfy your customers?
AQIP Criteria
   Understanding Students’       Planning Continuous
    and Stakeholders’ Needs        Improvement
   Valuing People                Building Collaborative
   Leading and                    Relationships
    Communicating                 Helping Students Learn
   Supporting Institutional      Accomplishing Other
    Operations                     Distinctive Objectives
                                  Measuring Effectiveness
AQIP vs. Baldrige Criteria
Guiding Values or Principles—
    The Way You Do It and Why?
   High Performance Organizations are Built on
       Research indicates that common principles permeate
        institutions that have achieved a systematic approach to
       Principle qualities underlie all of the criteria, processes, and
        services – they represent the values that AQIP is built on
Guiding Values (Principles) for
Academic Improvement
   Focus – Mission, vision             Collaboration – Encourages
   Involvement – Broad based,           active partnerships
    encourages ownership                Agility – Responds to change
   Leadership – Modeling,              Foresight – Thinks into the
                                        Information – Seek and use
   Learning – Develops                  data to assess performance
    everyone’s potential                Integrity –Recognizes and
   People – Invests in its people       fulfills its responsibility
AQIP Process
   Prepare
   Assess
   Engage
   Discern
   Commit to Action - AQIP Contract
 •   Interest Exploration
 •   Vital Focus Design Team Training
 •   Vital Focus Exploration Conversations
     •   Increase campus involvement
     •   Build an understanding of AQIP
     •   Collectively agree on priorities, strategies, and action projects
     •   Create a sense of ownership & responsibility for culture
   Constellation Survey-AQIP
   Baldrige Express
   Continuous Quality Improvement Network
       Trailblazer
       Pathfinders
   Results & Report:
     Constellation AQIP

   All College Conversation Day AQIP
   Conversation Summary Report AQIP
   Complete a Strategy for Action Workbook
   Attend a Strategy Forum-Peer Review
   Select Action Projects
   External Feedback Loop
Commit to Action
   AQIP Contract
   Annual Reports—Action Projects
   System’s Portfolio—every 3 years
   Reaffirmation of Accreditation—by the 7th
    year—onsite if no HLC visit in last 7 years
AQIP Is Evolving…….
   Project Pew Grant
   Criteria, Principles
   Process: Strategy Forum, Systems Portfolio
   Support: Vital Focus, Constellation Day
   Training: Facilitators, Design Leaders,
   Council for Higher Education Accreditation
    (CHEA) Review, November 2002
Operational Indicators (AQIP and
Traditional) Report in 2004
   Demographics                         Financial Strength-public
       Student headcount                    Net operating income/deficit
       Student status FT/PT                 Chg fund balance/expense
       Entering student enrollment          Expendable assets/debt
       Faculty, staff, admin,
        headcount                            Debt service
       Faculty status FT/PT                 Bond rating
   Programs                             Scope of Activities
       Number                               List of sites-headcount
       Addition/deletion                    Dual enrollment headcount HS
       Completion rates                     Distance education degree and
       FYE generated:                        certificate programs—modality
                                             Consortia/collaborative
        FT/PT faculty                         arrangements
       Instructional cost/FYE
Impact on Minnesota State
Colleges and Universities
   Accountability
   Data collection, dissemination, analysis
   Support for accreditation activities
   Policy
Linkage to Accountability &
Performance Reporting
   Strategic Plan
   Chancellor’s Work Plan – Specific goal to make
    adjustments as necessary to improve efficiency
    and effectiveness
   Performance Indicators
Data Collection & Analysis
   Annual Report with Operational Indicators
    replaces BID’s
   Web based collection – HCL Database
   Accurate data
   Trend data
   Benchmarking data—across system and with
    other higher ed institutions
   Decisions built on results from the data
    Office of the Chancellor Support
   Data
   Institutional Portfolio Tool
   Representative
       on site comprehensive visits
       focus visits requested by institutions
       participation in AQIP activities
   Institutional Change Requests—distance education
   MN Online Accreditation Project
   MnQIP
MnQIP Action Projects
   Data and Measures
   Training and Development
   Better Practices
   What training/development do I need now?

To top