1	From “IE” to “QE” – Finding a Silver Lining in the Clouds of Change
2	Our Disclaimer! We don’t claim to be SACS or CoC We understand that Principles is supposed to be something colleges and universities can figure out by themselves We’ve been thinking about it & believe that IR & IE folks will be leaders in the new processes
3	Key Factors* in the Principles of Accreditation Emphasis on student learning outcomes Emphasis on institutional improvement (through awareness of student learning outcomes, et al.) *According to Donna Wilkinson, Assoc. Exec. Dir. of CoC, 10/13/02
4	According to Donna Wilkinson, Assoc. Exec. Dir. of CoC, the Basic Assumptions Underlying the Principles of Accreditation are: Effective planning and evaluation processes are in place 2. Institutions are able to assume responsibility for evidence of compliance without prescriptive criteria from the Commission on Colleges (CoC) (i.e., that institutions are responsible for thinking through how to demonstrate compliance and then carrying out that demonstration on their own) 3. A renewed emphasis on Integrity, a core value and basic contract with stakeholders
5	Effective planning and evaluation processes are in place Assumption that all institutions have been able to meet the Criteria for planning and evaluation Condition of Eligibility 8, Criteria for Accreditation “The institution must have an appropriate plan, as well as a functioning planning and evaluation process, which identifies and integrates projected educational, physical and financial development, and incorporates procedures for program and institutional improvement.”
6	Effective planning and evaluation processes are in place Assumption that all institutions have been able to meet the Criteria for planning and evaluation 2. And, in Criteria, under Section II: Institutional Purpose: “[T]he institution must demonstrate that its planning and evaluation processes, educational programs, educational support services, financial and physical resources, and administrative processes are adequate and appropriate to fulfill its stated purpose.”
7	Effective planning and evaluation processes are in place Assumption that all institutions have been able to meet the Criteria for planning and evaluation 3. Section III: Institutional Effectiveness “The concept of institutional effectiveness is at the heart of the Commission’s philosophy of accreditation and is central to institutional programs and operations. . . .each member institution is expected to document quality and effectiveness by employing a comprehensive system of planning and evaluation in all major aspects of the institution.” (Followed by definitions of IE for various areas of the institution)
8	Effective planning and evaluation processes are in place Assumption that all institutions have been able to meet the Criteria for planning and evaluation Similar statements may be found in Criteria in Section IV Educational Program Section V Library & Other Learning Resources Section VI Administrative Processes CONCLUSION: It appears that, while Principles is less prescriptive about how an institution demonstrates effectiveness in planning & evaluation, Principles builds upon expectations established in Criteria
9	What does Principles say? Core Requirement 5: “The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission.” (Emphasis added)
10	What does Principles say? Under Governance and Administration, 16: Institutional Effectiveness: “The institution identifies expected outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; assesses whether it achieves these outcomes; and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results.” Similar statements may be found in Principles for Educational Programs Faculty Student Affairs & Services
11	From Criteria to Principles Institutional Effectiveness and Institutional Research still underpin the work of the institution in achieving planned outcomes The most important outcome is student success There is no separate mandate in Principles, as compared to 3.3 in Criteria, regarding Institutional Research
12	"Not necessarily;" Not necessarily; however it may mean that we will change the way we do some of the things we do. For Example? There is a more institution-wide focus in Principles, so we may find ourselves working in new areas, particularly being more engaged with learning outcomes Using a distributed IR model, rather than a centralized IR model Involving more of the campus community in our work, either directly as researchers or indirectly as advisors If IE has not particularly engaged IR, greater IE support role from IR
13	According to Donna Wilkinson, the Basic Assumptions Underlying the Principles of Accreditation are: 2. Institutions are able to assume responsibility for evidence of compliance without prescriptive criteria from the Commission on Colleges (CoC) (i.e., that institutions are responsible for thinking through how to demonstrate compliance and then carrying out that demonstration on their own) She recommended that institutions should Establish “acceptable” (self-defined by institution but subject to review & recommendation by reviewers) numerical or documentable performance goals Determine whether “acceptable” is good enough and, if not, set aspirational performance goals
14	"SUGGESTION:" SUGGESTION: Use existing standards set by external agencies as baseline for “acceptable”, such as LBB measures THECB IE standards Financial aid academic eligibility Professional/programmatic accreditors’ standards Grantors’ standards These establish a “floor” for which your institution is already accountable & can justify using as Performance Goals
15	"SACS doesn’t seem to be..." SACS doesn’t seem to be looking for a minimal effort to demonstrate minimal compliance with CoC requirements. Instead, they seem to desire evidence of continuous improvement, especially in student outcomes, arrived at by thoughtful activities & evaluations of results on the part of the institution. SO, the “floor” may not be an acceptable performance goal. If the institution is already at/above it, set goals to which you aspire. Sources might include: Peer institutions’ & aspirational institutions’ outcomes Grant requirements Zone of proximal learning (zone of proximal achievement)
16	According to Donna Wilkinson, the Basic Assumptions Underlying the Principles of Accreditation are: A renewed emphasis on Integrity, a core value and basic contract with stakeholders Principles on the purpose & philosophy of accreditation: “Both a process and a product, accreditation relies on integrity, thoughtful and principled judgment, the rigorous application of requirements, and a context of trust.”
17	How did she describe Integrity? Accurate and complete data The new report format is largely data with just enough verbiage to clarify tables Evaluation of honest and complete data and information, with compliance Compliance Certification requires sign-off from both SACS liaison and President
18	What does Principles say about Integrity? “The first task of the Commission when considering an institution’s accreditation status is to determine the institution’s integrity and its commitment to quality enhancement. These two principles serve as the foundation of the relationship between the Commission and its member and candidate institutions.” More about quality enhancement later!
19	More on Integrity from Principles: “Integrity is a core value essential to the purpose of higher education, functioning as the basic social contract defining the relationship between the Commission and each of the member institutions. . . .The Commission’s requirements, policies, processes, procedures, and decisions are predicated on integrity. “The Commission on Colleges expects integrity to govern the operation of institutions. Therefore, evidence of intentionally withholding information, deliberately providing inaccurate information to the public, or failing to provide timely information to the Commission will be construed as an indication of the lack of full commitment to integrity and may result in the loss of membership in the Commission on Colleges.”
20	Accreditation decisions will be based on evaluations of: “Compliance with the Principles of Accreditation defined as integrity and commitment to quality enhancement. Compliance with (12) Core Requirements. Compliance with Comprehensive Standards Compliance with additional requirements related to participation in Title IV programs.”
21	"Core Requirement 9" Core Requirement 9 “The number of full-time faculty members is adequate to support the mission of the institution. The institution has adequate faculty resources to ensure the quality and integrity of its academic programs.” COMMENT: Core Requirement 9 is typical of Principles in that how many full-time faculty and all faculty “resources” are needed is left to the institution’s discretion. The appropriateness of institutional decisions made about staffing are, however, to be measured by the quality and integrity of academic programs.
22	How can we in IR understand “integrity” in this context? Strict adherence to spirit of Principles Complete and accurate data, yielding best information, fully and punctually reported Core Requirement 5 in Principles “The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission.” COMMENT: This sounds like a good working description of the interactions of IR and Institutional Effectiveness.
23	Other implications for IR* Information systems designed for output, as well as input Data warehousing concepts, to allow access to decision-support data Queriable databases with user-friendly analytical tools for users Thin client or portal interfaces for Web access to data and information Quality information: (as defined by users), at least, accurate, timely, focused and expandable, integrated, easy to access Increased emphasis on efficiency and the financial interface with academic matters
24	Role of IR/IE in satisfying Principles Transform operational data into actionable information Serve as the information factory Broker the information flow Provide the decision-support system
25	“On the nature of institutional research and the knowledge and skills it requires”* The institutional researcher should possess: 1. Technical/Analytical Intelligence Factual knowledge and methodological skills Issues Intelligence Knowledge of major issues and decision areas, along with recognition of political character of decision Contextual Intelligence understanding of higher ed & particular institution, along with organizational savvy and wisdom *P. Terenzini
26
27	What does Principles have to say about “Quality Enhancement”? Core Requirement 12 “The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan and demonstrates the plan is part of an ongoing planning and evaluation process.”
28	What does CoC seem to mean by “Quality”? Examples from Principles: “Accreditation enhances educational quality. . . .It provides an assessment of an institution’s effectiveness in the fulfillment of its mission, its compliance with the requirements of its accrediting association, and its continuing efforts to enhance the quality of student learning and its programs and services.”
29	What does CoC seem to mean by “Quality”? Examples from Principles: “The first task of the Commission when considering an institution’s accreditation status is to determine the institution’s integrity and its commitment to quality enhancement. These two principles serve as the foundation of the relationship between the Commission and its member and candidate institutions.”
30	What does CoC seem to mean by “Quality”? Principles of Accreditation: Quality Enhancement “The Commission on Colleges expects institutions to dedicate themselves to enhancing the quality of their programs and services within the context of their missions, resources, and capacities, and creating an environment in which teaching, research, and learning occur. The concept of quality enhancement is at the heart of the Commission’s philosophy of accreditation; this presumes each member institution is engaged in an ongoing program of improvement and can demonstrate how well it fulfills its stated mission. Although evaluation of an institution’s educational quality and its effectiveness is a difficult task requiring careful analysis and professional judgment, an institution is expected to document quality and effectiveness in all its major aspects.” (Emphasis added. Compare to IE in Criteria.)
31	What does CoC seem to mean by “Quality”? The Process of Accreditation “The internal review provides an institution the opportunity to consider its effectiveness and its compliance with the accreditation requirements. . . .Furthermore, it helps an institution to evaluate its efforts in enhancing the quality of student learning and the quality of programs and services offered to its constituencies. . .” [The external reviewers] “assess an institution’s compliance with the Commission’s accreditation requirements and its efforts to enhance the quality of its programs and services.”
32	Accreditation decisions will be based on evaluations of: “Compliance with the Principles of Accreditation defined as integrity and commitment to quality enhancement. Compliance with Core Requirements. Compliance with Comprehensive Standards Compliance with additional requirements related to participation in Title IV programs.”
33	What is a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)? First, it assumes quality is already present. Core Requirement 12: “The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan and demonstrates the plan is part of an ongoing planning and evaluation process.” Also assumes that an ongoing, research driven planning and evaluation process is also present.
34	Donna Wilkinson’s definition of the QEP “A course of action for institutional improvement focused on student learning, with measurable results.” She listed its components as being Research issues Goals Implementation Evaluation COMMENTS -- We see these as related to: Research Issues, goals, & evaluation -- IR & IE Implementation -- IE As practiced at STCC
35	Wilkinson identified as parts of the process for establishing the QEP. . . Conducting a thorough analysis (using SWOT methodology) of external and internal learning environment Clarifying the relationship between the QEP and ongoing planning Clarifying the relationship between the QEP and its use(s) for institutional improvement Identifying and utilizing a plan/method for evaluating QEP
36	"Is there a silver lining..." Is there a silver lining to these clouds of change? YES! Institutions with solid bases in IR and IE should have no trouble seguing from Criteria to Principles Focus on student learning outcomes: relatively easy to quantify and report resonates with both internal and external stakeholders Texas increasingly links with funding
37	Checklist in preparation for Principles Begin process of changing language and thinking NOW. Complete & accurate institutional data systematically collected, reported and used to evaluate and guide continuous improvement Reasonable & demonstrable standards set for outcomes Continuously improving outcomes, especially for students Mission accomplishment Accurate & punctual reports of outcomes to stakeholders, including CoC Well-planned QEP in place, implemented, data collected and reported, use of findings to continue enhancement of quality Help institutional leaders keep their eyes on the ball!
38
39	How is STCC Preparing? We’ve introduced the terminology of “principles,” “quality,” “quality enhancement,” “QE,” and “quality enhancement plan.” We’ve begun to consciously focus the institution on the direction we’d like to see the QEP to take. In our approach to IE we’ve begun adding a brief overview of Principles to every discussion. We’ve begun demonstrating that an IE Plan, done well, should lead right into the approach in Principles with the minimum of hassle. We’ve identified 6 Intended Outcomes of our work as an institution of higher education, to be implemented institution wide through IE. 2 of these – Student Success and Access & Equity – are mandatory for every work group’s IE Plan.
40	Purpose of Institutional Effectiveness (IE) To develop and implement unit planning and self-assessment processes
41	Select 3-6 Outcomes
42	What are the facts? How does my department or program contribute to student success?
43	Performance Indicators Should Include both short-term and long-term indicators
44	Set the Performance Standard for Improvement What performance level do we need to show improvement?
45	Other required information Resources Needed: What budget requests will we be processing? Have we linked IE & Budget? New Staff Travel Funds Equipment Funds
46	"Dr." Dr. Gail Dantzker, Director Institutional Research and Effectiveness South Texas Community College P.O. Box 9701 McAllen TX 78502-9701 (956) 688-2308 Gdantz@stcc.cc.tx.us Mrs. Jacque Gillispie Institutional Effectiveness Specialist Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness South Texas Community College (956) Jacqueg@stcc.cc.tx.us