Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Institutional Effectiveness_AQIP Report 4


									Institutional Effectiveness/AQIP Yearly Summary 4.18.06

Action Projects                                                                      Please click here to
                                                                                     send your anonymous
The college currently has three action projects:                                     comments specific to
                                                                                     our Action Projects.
Implement MSC-ST’s Professional Development Plan has focused on                      Thank you.
encouraging all supervisors to include professional development activities on
the employee evaluation form, this beginning at last July’s all-manager meeting in Wabasha. Three
editions of the “PD Gazette” have also been produced this year to encourage employees to be more
self-directed in seeking PD opportunities. Deanna will present this AP at April 18th’s MnQIP meeting
to share best practices and learn from our partner MnQIP institutions also pursuing AP’s promoting
professional development. Thanks to Deanna Voth and Greg Beckwith for their leadership on this

Improvement of Student Learning Services has focused on Utilization of Career Services to raise
awareness and utilization of career services offered through each LRC. Working with Chris Humble
and Tascha Kinney the team is responsible for the tri-fold brochures and table tents produced this
year among other forms of communication. Soon posters will be added to each campus. The
campaign will continue in the Fall. The AP will simultaneously focus on library services with the team
laying the groundwork this year yet. Thanks to Steve Zmyewski for his leadership on this project.

Evidence of progress on Assessment of Student Learning can be found throughout our individual
programs and at our Fall/Spring in-services by the number of assessment related breakout sessions.
Too, Sally presented to MnQIP the progress made on this project last March. Click here for Sally’s
handout used at the MnQIP presentation – it provides a better summary of progress than that
presented here. Thanks to Sally, Neva, and Lavonne for their work on this project.

Action Project Annual Updates are due September 14, 2006. Click here for specific

AQIP Steering to Institutional Effectiveness
In October 2005, the AQIP Steering Committee changed its name to            Please click here to send
“Institutional Effectiveness” and divided itself into two groups, Project   your anonymous comments
                                                                            specific to the IE committee
Management and Systems Portfolio. Our goal with these groupings was         and how the two groupings
to develop expertise in the two areas where we needed it most. The large    are functioning. Thank you.
group will convene again in the fall to begin reviewing the systems
portfolio with a fine-tooth comb and to ensure that each team (PM and SP) have clear goals for the

                                      Project Management Group
Beginning November, the Project Management team focused on creating a project development and
management form (template) intended to embed common PM terms (“outcomes”, “strategies”,
“tasks”) into our action project teams and, ideally, into our annual unit work plan implementation.
Integrating applicable category questions into planning was included in the form. Our professional
development and LRC AP’s are helping craft it for broader use within the college.

In addition to providing advice to the action project leads, the team decided that tackling a piece of the
now retired communication action project would be helpful to raise the team’s expertise in project
management. To date the group has focused on communication meeting results: identifying modes

Institutional Effectiveness/AQIP Yearly Summary 4.18.06

of communication best suited to specific audiences. All documents related to this groups work are on
H:\AQIP project management group results 2006.

                                       Systems Portfolio Group
For information on what the Systems Portfolio is and how it serves our college, click here.
This team is to serve as the truth squad with our Systems Portfolio, due April, 2007. Their basic
questions in evaluating an answer submitted for review include:

        Is this answer true? Has it been validated by those most impacted?
        Does it contain the elements that AQIP Systems Appraisers are looking for: Clarity,
         currency, and with process descriptions?
        Is the data utilized to generate this answer indicated in the answer, linked live, and in a
         known/reliable location?
        Is the answer linked to our college’s strategic plan and department planning cycles?

The team met three times since October, utilizing submissions by our Improvement of Student
Learning Services action project and answers relating to planning and institutional data from Amy
Nelson and John Huth to gain expertise. The group will meet as needed (most likely without faculty)
during the summer as the Executive Council submits answers to the portfolio.

 Tim and Mohamed are guiding this group – Tim’s experience with accreditation and Mohamed
    being an AQIP Systems Appraiser has helped this group get a handle on what they expect out of
    an answer. A frustration is that AQIP continues to be a moving target – their expectations
    change often. For example, AQIP recently added an on-site quality check-up visit. Mohamed’s
    and Tim’s advice becomes even more critical to this group as AQIP evolves.
 E-Portfolio. We will create and finalize our Systems Portfolio electronically through the new e-folio

All information on these meetings is in email form. Click here for this information.

Timeline for the Systems Portfolio
  September 1: Bulk of questions answered and reviewed by SP Group. Organization Overview
        complete. All work to the writing team (Sally, Michael Larson, John Huth, ??)
  November 1: 1st Draft Complete. Review/revision by IE team/Executive Council
  January 15: 2nd Draft Complete. Review/revision by IE team/Executive Council
  February 1: Links to HLC Criteria for accreditation identified
  March 15: 3rd Draft Complete. External Review by MnQIP partners.
  April 1: Final Portfolio submitted to AQIP

The Systems Portfolio & Planning:                                                 Please click here to send
                                                                                  your anonymous
Documenting Institutional Effectiveness                                           comments specific to our
                                                                                  linking the Systems
AQIP is about how our college continually improves its processes and              Portfolio to our long and
                                                                                  short term planning cycles.
systems to help students learn. The Systems Portfolio is our report toward
                                                                                  Thank you.
that end. Click here for the specific category questions we answer to
generate our portfolio.

There is no doubt the SE Tech excels at meeting its mission, vision, and values. There is no doubt
that “Continuous Improvement” is something we do all the time.

Institutional Effectiveness/AQIP Yearly Summary 4.18.06

Amy Nelson and John Huth are leading IDEALS 2011, our Strategic/Department Planning initiative.
Through IDEALS 2011, we are attempting to:

        Use AQIP’s questions and requirements to simultaneously inform and capture our
         institutional (strategic) and unit (department) planning.

        Provide a uniform operational unit planning process that formalizes and records our
         continuous improvement activities in real-time.

Please click here for more information on how IDEALS 2011 is linked to our Systems Portfolio.

Quick Facts:
       We will answer roughly 35-40 of the 140 required questions in this round with this approach
       Click here for the process map Amy generated to walk us through this
       We should have the college’ Strategic Plan in draft form no later than mid-may
       We should have the completed published Strategic Plan by August
       A large part of the Systems Portfolio is identifying our processes and describing how we
             improve them. Julie Smedzuik-O’brien, from MnSCU, is being engaged to teach us
             process mapping. She will focus on our nursing admission process in early May and

Is it working?
        Plusses: Involvement with Strategic Planning is higher than last time. Also, with operational
        units submitting their own goal proposals, the final plan will reflect that hard work much more
        than last time. Operational unit planning will help ensure that measures are in place and that
        processes are identified that directly relate to our institutional 5-year goals.

       Minuses: Informing people of what this is about and why is a continual challenge. In addition,
       we started late and, with the end-year crunch occurring, scheduling is tough. Time is tight
       because budgeting is tied to goal setting. Too, we need to train people to lead themselves
       through a CI planning cycle – a focus in the future.

Keys to Success
         Creating strong links from the strategic plan to each unit’s annual work plan – including
              specific outcomes, strategies, tasks, timelines, and measures.
         A goal has been to create application of the category questions so that the Portfolio is not
              just a writing exercise. Too, we must find ways to use the Portfolio to help us make
              improvements once it is completed. It is a potential tool for generating action
         The formal planning cycle for our operational units is a key to help get us all on the “same
              page” with how we define Continuous Improvement here.
         Communication of results. We have work to do here.

AQIP Coordinator’s Goals & Observations
  See dates above for completion of the Systems Portfolio                       Please click here to send
                                                                                 your anonymous comments
  PM Group: i.d. and train liaisons to the Action Projects to provide real-     to help with goal-setting for
       time guidance as the projects are facilitated, ensure tracking forms      2006-2007. Thank you.
       meet the needs of the AP’s and the college as a whole, and work
       to embed common project management terms and practices to a

Institutional Effectiveness/AQIP Yearly Summary 4.18.06

       larger audience
  SP Group: Shape and complete the Systems Portfolio, advise to maximize involvement in
       creating the portfolio.
  Large IE Group: Target specific application of the Systems Portfolio internally and externally, &
       design a new process for identifying action projects – Steve Zmyewski is taking a lead on
  Better communication of activities via announcement page and IE website.

Our Action Projects are making a difference for people – Career Services, the PD Gazette, and all of
the activity specific to assessment show that things are changing. Make certain to acknowledge those
involved – they are doing the work there.

When we look at last two college in-service breakout session options, it’s obvious that our leadership
is attentive to communication, assessment, and even the individual AQIP category questions (“Our
common student learning outcomes” & the visioning sessions for academic/strategic planning).
These are rooted in their desires to improve SE Tech, but AQIP is there to help guide and capture
their efforts. Too, by the Executive Council adopting dashboard measures and by working to ensure
our strategic directions, college goals, and resulting plans are all measurable and regularly reviewed,
we have taken a giant stride in formalizing CI here.

Amy and I had the goal, with the AQIP Category Questions, of finding ways to make our answering
them as purposeful as possible – that’s why the ties to strategic/operational unit planning. Why
answer the category questions if they aren’t within a framework to really help us improve? We won’t
know how effective we are specific to this for a while yet, but I’m optimistic. I do think our answering
the questions, regardless of context or framework will help us, but the time and energy devoted to this
must result in more than just an accreditation document. Too, we have to find ways of integrating our
completed portfolio into how we improve and how we communicate to the public for it to be a
worthwhile exercise. I am convinced that Jim has not lost sight of this.

The Systems Portfolio group got off to a late but good start – especially with Tim’s and Mohamed’s
help. They should have a lot of meat to chew on soon enough – without answers to evaluate there
was no reason to meet. The Project Management group has been doing well – their real work is
coming up with unit/operation work plans – with universal concepts of “outcomes”, “strategies”, and
“tasks”, and specific measures attached to our work plans, we will have CI down cold. Thanks to Amy
and Evy for leading that group.

Communication and group leadership are things I wrestle with the most – you continue to experience
that but know I am aware and am working on it. I feel I have improved but never enough to feel
satisfied. I appreciate your individual guidance and supportive criticism. I still need to be much more
out front, leading the way on this initiative.

Our college has improved very rapidly and in so many ways. Our leaders and the initiative of our
faculty and staff are driving these efforts – but if AQIP is informing us, and I know it is, then we are
contributing to that success. I know that our complete Systems Portfolio will reflect your work and will
help us continue down this promising road. Thanks.
                                                                            Please click here to send your
I invite your comments and criticisms: below is a comment box that          anonymous comments on John
will route your comment through an outside server, this to ensure your      Huth’s performance as AQIP
anonymity. It cannot be traced. I will share all results with Sally and     Coordinator. Thank you.
Jim so they can make decisions specific to the AQIP Coordinator
Position and my role in it.


To top