Continuing ASU’s Accreditation with the Higher Learning Commission Campus Forum Presentation October 2012.

Continuing ASU’s Continuing ASU’s Accreditation with the Accreditation with the

Higher Learning CommissionHigher Learning Commission

Campus Forum PresentationCampus Forum PresentationOctober 2012October 2012

What it is?What it is?

• In the U.S., institutions of higher education In the U.S., institutions of higher education “voluntarily” “voluntarily” seek accreditation from non-seek accreditation from non-governmental bodies.governmental bodies.

• Students obtain federal financial aid Students obtain federal financial aid onlyonly from those higher education institutions from those higher education institutions accredited by an agency recognized by the accredited by an agency recognized by the U. S. Dept. of Education.U. S. Dept. of Education.

Who cares?Who cares?

• Accreditation provides assurance to Accreditation provides assurance to the the publicpublic (including prospective students) that (including prospective students) that an institution:an institution:– meets clearly stated requirements for institutional

quality– has shown reasonable grounds, based on

educational and fiscal soundness, for believing that it will continue to meet them

• Accreditation also provides an opportunity Accreditation also provides an opportunity and incentive for and incentive for self-improvementself-improvement in the in the accredited organizationaccredited organization

Who does it?Who does it?• For institutions of higher learning in the U.S., there are six regional For institutions of higher learning in the U.S., there are six regional

agencies (“associations”) that provide accreditation : agencies (“associations”) that provide accreditation : Middle Middle States, New England, North Central, Northwest, Southern, and States, New England, North Central, Northwest, Southern, and Western.Western.

Who does it?Who does it?

• ASU is accredited by the ASU is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission Higher Learning Commission

(HLC)(HLC) of the of the North Central AssociationNorth Central Association..

When does it happen?When does it happen?

• Every accredited institution must have its Every accredited institution must have its accreditation reaffirmed accreditation reaffirmed not later than ten years not later than ten years after its most recent reaffirmationafter its most recent reaffirmation..– Under unusual circumstances, the process can be delayed

for a year

• If deficiencies exist, NCA/HLC may require If deficiencies exist, NCA/HLC may require focused visits focused visits or or interim reports interim reports between between comprehensive visitscomprehensive visits

• NCA/HLC regularly examines annual reports and NCA/HLC regularly examines annual reports and other information to see whether changes have other information to see whether changes have occurred (or are anticipated) that would occurred (or are anticipated) that would necessitate a change in the timing of the next necessitate a change in the timing of the next evaluation. evaluation.

When does it happen?When does it happen?

• What about ASU?What about ASU?– The “oldest” current accreditation period for an

ASU campus began in 2003, when “ASU Main” [sic] and “ASU East” [sic] were last re-accredited.

– The Downtown Phoenix campus and the West campus accreditations were subsequently merged into the overall ASU accreditation.

– With the accreditation processes now merged for all campuses, this determines the date for ASU’s next re-accreditation: 2013

What is the What is the primary goal primary goal for the ASU for the ASU reaccreditation effort?reaccreditation effort?

• The primary goal is the reaffirmation of ASU’s The primary goal is the reaffirmation of ASU’s accreditation without requirements by HLC for accreditation without requirements by HLC for follow up interim reports or visits. follow up interim reports or visits.

• To that end, we have:To that end, we have:– Identified and resolved issues that might hinder

achieving this goal.

– Documented that ASU meets all Criteria for Accreditation in a Self-Study Report.

– Carried out the process with integrity so that the findings will be accepted not only by HLC but also by the communities served by ASU.

How has/will How has/will the process work?the process work?

• We conducted a comprehensive review of all operational We conducted a comprehensive review of all operational areas with respect to HLC’s areas with respect to HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation.Criteria for Accreditation.

• We summarized that review in a We summarized that review in a Self-Study Report Self-Study Report in in accordance with HLC expectations.accordance with HLC expectations.

• An HLC An HLC Evaluation TeaEvaluation Teamm will conduct a will conduct a comprehensive site comprehensive site visitvisit for continuing accreditation for continuing accreditation (March 25-27, 2013(March 25-27, 2013)), and , and write a report containing the team’s recommendations. write a report containing the team’s recommendations.

• HLC’s HLC’s Institutional Actions Council Institutional Actions Council will take action on the will take action on the Evaluation Team report. Evaluation Team report.

• HLC HLC Board of Trustees Board of Trustees will validate the work of the IAC, will validate the work of the IAC, finalizing the action.finalizing the action.

• Notification of the final decision will be sent during Notification of the final decision will be sent during Fall 2013Fall 2013..

What are the HLC What are the HLC Criteria for AccreditationCriteria for Accreditation??

• MissionMission.. The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations.institution’s operations.

• Integrity: Ethical and Responsible ConductIntegrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct.. The institution acts with integrity; its The institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.conduct is ethical and responsible.

• Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support. The institution The institution provides high-quality academic programs, wherever and however its offerings are provides high-quality academic programs, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.delivered.

• Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement.Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement. The institution The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

• Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness.Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness. The institution’s The institution’s resources, structures, and processes are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the resources, structures, and processes are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and opportunities. The institution plans for the future. opportunities. The institution plans for the future.

Criterion ComponentsCriterion Components

Example: Criterion 1 – Mission The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations.

ComponentsA.The institution’s mission is broadly understood within the institution and guides its operations.B.The mission is articulated publicly. C.The institution understands the relationship between its mission and the diversity of society. D.The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

Criterion SubcomponentsCriterion Subcomponents

Example: Component 1AThe institution’s mission is broadly understood within

the institution and guides its operations.

Subcomponents1.The mission statement is developed through a process suited to the nature and culture of the institution and is adopted by the governing board.2.The institution’s academic programs, student support services, and enrollment profile are consistent with its stated mission.3.The institution’s planning and budgeting priorities align with and support the mission.

How has the ASU Self-Study How has the ASU Self-Study effort been organized?effort been organized?

• Director: Director: Barry Ritchie (assistant: Peggy Reid)Barry Ritchie (assistant: Peggy Reid)• Steering Committee: Steering Committee: Barry Ritchie, Maria Allison, Fred Barry Ritchie, Maria Allison, Fred

Corey, Mark Lussier, Eduardo PagCorey, Mark Lussier, Eduardo Pagáán, Jean Stutz, Craig n, Jean Stutz, Craig ThatcherThatcher

• Criterion Teams: Criterion Teams: One team for each criterion, 5 One team for each criterion, 5 members or so per team; see next slide.members or so per team; see next slide.

• Resource Team: Resource Team: provides additional conduits for provides additional conduits for informationinformation

• Editorial Team: Editorial Team: finalizes Self-Study Reportfinalizes Self-Study Report

Criterion Team leadershipCriterion Team leadership

• Mission. Mission. Bob Clinton, Liz Hinde (Jean Stutz)Bob Clinton, Liz Hinde (Jean Stutz)• Integrity. Integrity. Patricia Friedrich, Bill Verdini (Eduardo PagPatricia Friedrich, Bill Verdini (Eduardo Pagáán)n)• Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and

Planning. Planning. Duku Anokye and Jennifer Fewell (Maria Allison)Duku Anokye and Jennifer Fewell (Maria Allison) • Teaching and Learning : Evaluation and Improvement:Teaching and Learning : Evaluation and Improvement:

Chell Roberts and Hilairy Hartnett (Mark Lussier)Chell Roberts and Hilairy Hartnett (Mark Lussier)• Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness: Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness:

Doug Olsen, Linda Vaughan (Fred Corey)Doug Olsen, Linda Vaughan (Fred Corey)

Resource TeamResource Team

Chief Financial Officer: Chief Financial Officer:  Joanne Wamsley, Marilyn MulhollanJoanne Wamsley, Marilyn Mulhollan

Educational Outreach & Student ServicesEducational Outreach & Student Services::  Safali EvansSafali Evans

Enrollment Management: Enrollment Management:   Kent HopkinsKent Hopkins

Institutional Analysis:Institutional Analysis:      Melinda GebelMelinda Gebel

Evaluation Educational & Effectiveness:Evaluation Educational & Effectiveness:  Shelly PottsShelly Potts

University Technology Office:University Technology Office:    Kendal BurkhartKendal Burkhart

Knowledge Enterprise Development: Knowledge Enterprise Development:   Tamara DeuserTamara Deuser

Intercollegiate Athletics:Intercollegiate Athletics:    Dawn RogersDawn Rogers

General Counsel:General Counsel:        Cynthia JewettCynthia Jewett

Editorial TeamEditorial Team

• General Editorial: General Editorial: Maria Allison, Kate Eaton, Maria Allison, Kate Eaton, Shelly Potts, Peggy Reid, Shelly Potts, Peggy Reid, Barry Ritchie, Craig Barry Ritchie, Craig ThatcherThatcher

• Data Team:Data Team: Charles Charles Barbee, Melanie Burford, Barbee, Melanie Burford, Craig ThatcherCraig Thatcher

• Graphics Design:Graphics Design: Angela SimonAngela Simon

What is the timeline?What is the timeline?July ‘09July ‘09 Accreditation effort director selectedAccreditation effort director selected

Spring ‘10Spring ‘10 Steering Committee appointedSteering Committee appointedSpring ‘11 Spring ‘11 Form and charge Criterion Teams Form and charge Criterion Teams

Summer-Fall ’11Summer-Fall ’11 Criterion Teams gather data, write reports Criterion Teams gather data, write reports Establish Electronic Resource RoomEstablish Electronic Resource Room

Winter Fall ‘11 Winter Fall ‘11 Steering Committee reviews Self-Study draft (v 1) Steering Committee reviews Self-Study draft (v 1) Selection of site visit date by HLCSelection of site visit date by HLC

Early Spring ‘12 Early Spring ‘12 Editorial Team, Steering Committee revises draft (v 2 and v3)Editorial Team, Steering Committee revises draft (v 2 and v3)May ’12May ’12 Draft of Self-Study Report (v 3) available internally to University CouncilDraft of Self-Study Report (v 3) available internally to University Council

Summer ’12Summer ’12 Revisions of draft based on comments; Revisions of draft based on comments; Evaluation Team appointedEvaluation Team appointedFall ’12Fall ’12 Self-Study Report (v 4) available for entire ASU community comment; Self-Study Report (v 4) available for entire ASU community comment;

forums on each campusforums on each campusNovember ’12November ’12 Final revision and completion of Self-Study Report; gather third party Final revision and completion of Self-Study Report; gather third party

comment comment January ‘13January ‘13 Self-Study Report and materials provided to HLC Evaluation Team Self-Study Report and materials provided to HLC Evaluation Team

March 25-27, ‘13March 25-27, ‘13 HLC Evaluation Team visit occursHLC Evaluation Team visit occursFall ‘13Fall ‘13 HLC issues reaffirmation of accreditationHLC issues reaffirmation of accreditation

ASU’s HLC 2013 Evaluation TeamASU’s HLC 2013 Evaluation TeamW. Randy Smith (Team Chair) Vice Provost for Academic Programs, Ohio State University

Augustine O. Agho Dean, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

Juan N. Franco Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs & Prof of Educ., University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Ingrid Gould Assoc. Provost for Faculty and Student Affairs, University of Chicago

Jennifer L. Heller Asst. Director of the Humanities and Western, Civilization Program, University of Kansas

Wayne Jacobson Coordinator of Undergraduate Assessment, University of Iowa

Ralph J. Katerberg Professor, Lindner College of Business, Administration, University of Cincinnati

Elaine M. Klein Asst. Dean for Academic Planning, Program, Review and Assessment, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Jim Perry HT Morse Distinguished University Professor, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Ruth Person Chancellor, University of Michigan at Flint

Terry Potter Assoc. Vice Chancellor, University of Colorado Denver

Morteza A. Rahimi Professor Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Northwestern University

William Ray Assoc. Vice President for Academic Affairs, Vice Provost for OU-Tulsa, University of Oklahoma

Jon Alan Story Senior Assoc. Dean of the Graduate School, Purdue University

Mo-Yin S. Tam Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, University of Illinois at Chicago

Devarajan Venugopalan Assoc. Vice Chancellor, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Where do Where do youyou fit in? fit in?• Read and comment on the Read and comment on the

Self-Study draft*Self-Study draft*

• Attend forums and Attend forums and encourage others to attendencourage others to attend

• Ask questions and learn Ask questions and learn about the process about the process

• Site visit: Site visit:

March 25-27, 2013 March 25-27, 2013 174 days from 174 days from todaytoday

* http://accreditation.asu.edu/resourceroom/index.php/selfStudyReport

Questions?Questions?

[email protected]

Visit http://hlc2013.asu.eduVisit http://hlc2013.asu.edu