QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ACCREDITATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA: AN OVERVIEW

Transcription

1 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ACCREDITATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA: AN OVERVIEW Presented by: University of Georgia, Office of Academic Planning May 03, 2011, 11:15am-12:30pm Bob Boehmer, Associate Provost for Academic Planning Denise Gardner, Director of Institutional Research Allan Aycock, Director of Assessment and Accreditation

2 2 Increasing Demands for Accountability in U.S. Higher Education 2006 Spellings Commission Report 2010 Editorial President of Council on Higher Education

3 3 Reasons for Quality Assurance at Regional Accreditation UGA Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Colleges Specialized Accreditation (approximately 80 at the University of Georgia) Policies of University System of Georgia Communication with External Constituencies Legislature Donors Grant sponsors Assure that the university is achieving its mission and strategic goals Reputation Continuous improvement

4 4 What Quality Assurance Processes Exist at UGA? Quality assurance processes in place at the University of Georgia include: Strategic Plan (institution and all major units) Annual reports Describe progress towards measures of strategic progress Annual budget conferences Student learning outcomes assessment All degree programs Each must have a plan in place and annually report assessment results See Voluntary System of Accountability report General education Program review (all academic departments) Every 7 years Considers results of student learning outcomes assessment Support unit review (all administrative units) Every 7 years Processes for review of individual faculty Annual evaluation Course evaluations Promotion and tenure process Post tenure review process

5 5 The Regional Accreditation Process in the U.S. Why Participate? Recognition of the accrediting organization by the federal Department of Education is required Tied to access to federal funds or student loans, research funding, etc. The recognized accrediting body then adopts Principles of Accreditation and implements a review process Peer driven Mission driven Integrity is at the core of the Principles Each member institution then conducts a periodic self-analysis of compliance with the Principles of Accreditation Reaffirmation of accreditation every 10 years plus Fifth Year Review plus Substantive Change reports Review of compliance with Principles by a team of peer evaluators follows Off-Site; and On-Site Sanctions for failure to comply may result Recommendations may be followed by sanctions such as probation or removal from membership Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Colleges UGA s current SACS reaffirmation process

6 6 What do the Principles of Accreditation Require? Principles of Accreditation of SACSCOC In large part, these are broad, general standards It is the responsibility of the institution to make its case in light of the unique mission of that institution Example: 2.8 The number of full-time faculty members is adequate to support the mission of the institution and to ensure the quality and integrity of its academic programs. Consider: Multiple degree programs at multiple levels Extended campuses Distance education offerings The review team must then make a professional judgment of compliance or non-compliance based on the institution s compliance certification and its interviews and document review

7 7 Assessment is Now the Center of Attention in the Accreditation Process National calls for Accountability and Transparency have led to a major focus on these areas: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment The institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results in each of the following areas: educational programs, to include student learning outcomes Institutional Effectiveness 2.5 The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that (1) incorporate a systematic review of institutional mission, goals, and outcomes; (2)result in continuing improvement in institutional quality; and (3)demonstrate the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. These are the most commonly cited reasons for recommendations by accreditors to member institutions

8 8 Does UGA Compare Itself Methodically with Other Institutions of Higher Education? To whom does the University of Georgia regularly compare itself? ps.html Comparator Peers Iowa State University University of California - Davis Louisiana State University University of Florida Michigan State University University of Iowa North Carolina State University University of Kentucky Ohio State University Univ. of Maryland - College Park University of Arizona University of Missouri - Columbia Aspirational Peers University of California - Berkeley University of Texas - Austin University of California - Los Angeles University of Virginia University of Illinois - Urbana- Champaign University of Washington University of Michigan - Ann Arbor University of Wisconsin Madison University of Minnesota Pennsylvania State University Univ. of North Carolina - Chapel Hill Cornell University

9 9 Are External Rankings of Institutions of Higher Education Considered? Do these have a significant role in quality assurance? Consider: Multiplicity of rankings See, for example: ankings.html Wide variance in methodology See discussion of the U.S. News and World Rept. Methodology /oirstdy.html Wide variance in motivation for issuing rankings Examples of rankings of the University of Georgia U.S. News and World Report 2011 list of top public universities #18 (tie) Kiplinger Magazine Best Values (among 100 public institutions in U.S.) #9

10 Thank You! 10 Contact information: Questions and discussion