Mission College
Preparation of the
Accreditation Self-Evaluation
WVMCCD Board of Trustees
November 19, 2013
S
Overview and Purpose
S What is the purpose of Accreditation?
S An effective institution ensures that its resources and processes
support student learning, continuously assesses that learning,
and pursues institutional excellence and improvement.
S Why do we do a “Self-Evaluation?”
S How often?
S 6 Year Cycle
Accreditation Standards
S Standards in Brief
S I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness
S II: Student Learning Programs and Services
S III: Resources (Human, Physical, Fiscal, Technology)
S IV: Leadership and Governance
Self Evaluation Document
Preparation Structure
Accreditation Oversight Committee
GAP serves as the oversight committee
Accreditation Steering Committee
Includes Faculty Liaison, Accreditation Officer,
Document Editor, and Researcher
4 Standards Writing Teams
Focused teams for collecting evidence and writing;
Teams Include Faculty, Classified Staff, & Administrators
Timeline of Preparation
S Fall 2012–Standards Teams completion of templates and
initial identification of evidence
S Spring 2013— Initial review, additional evidence gathering,
begin pulling into one comprehensive draft
S Summer 2013—Identification of gaps; continue editing
S Fall 2013—Fill in gaps; targeted groups review for accuracy
and thoroughness
Process Kickoff
S Standards Teams identified Spring/Summer 2012
S Full Teams Kickoff event August, 2012
S Training on standards and rubrics
S Process of discovery and gathering evidence
S Collaboration on ANGEL learning management
S Resource binders
S
S
S
Reference materials
Sample templates
Potential locations for evidence
Team Chairs
Recognition
I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness: Kathy Henderson & Zita Melton with
Daniel Peck
II: Student Learning Programs and Services: Sarah Sullivan & Sarah Randle;
Theresa Lawhead & Lucia Moreno; Carol Brockmeier & John Spencer with
Tim Karas, Penny Johnson, Rita Grogan
III: Resources (Human, Physical, Fiscal, Technology): Cathy Cox & Kena
Rogers; Pat Hudak & Greg Shaw; Clement Lam & My Loi with Rick Bennett,
Mina Jahan
IV: Leadership and Governance: Dianne Dorian &Susan Monahan with Laurel
Jones, Penny Johnson
Participatory Involvement
S Structure of the Standards Teams
S Co-chairs of Faculty and Classified Staff
S Members include faculty, classified staff, administrators, & students
S Draft made available online in late Spring
S Ability to post feedback
S Recurring updates and reminders for feedback to college
S
Targeted visits to participatory and operational groups
S Academic Senate, Classified Senate, GAP, Division Council,
Student Services Council, Counseling Department meeting,
Curriculum Cmt, Institutional Effectiveness Cmt, Technology Cmt,
and more
Online Document
S https://sites.google.com/site/missionaccreditation/
Addressing Action Items
S Through this Self Evaluation, the College has identified
“Actionable Improvement Plans”
S The college is already working to address identified areas for
improvement
S Goal to address areas prior to March Site Visit
S Two primary areas of emphasis
S Distance Learning (infrastructure, training, monitoring)
S Student Learning Outcomes (documentation of assessment,
linkage to program and institutional outcomes)
Final Steps
S Remaining Stages of Preparing Document
S Final formatting and editing
S Insertion of final pieces of evidence
S Final Draft review by primary participatory groups
S Already given to GAP, Academic Senate, and Classified Senate
S Final formatted version available by start of December
S Mailed to ACCJC in January
Site Visit Preparation
S Preparing Access to Evidence
S Posting all evidence online and creating thumb drives for
visiting team
S Messaging to College Campus
S Creating document summaries and brief mini-videos to raise
awareness prior to the visit
S Preparation of team room and meeting schedule
S Site Visit in March 2014
Post Site Visit
S ACCJC likely will take action in June
S The college will continue to address identified areas for
action
Discussion