Northwest Commission on College and Universities (NWCCU) Annual Update for WSQA

advertisement
Northwest Commission on College and Universities (NWCCU)
Annual Update for WSQA
Academic Year 2014-2015
Due November 6, 2015
College Name: Spokane Falls Community College
Contact Person: Dr. James E. Minkler, Vice President of Learning
Contact Phone: (509) 533-3764
Contact email: jim.minkler@sfcc.spokane.edu
Accreditation recommendations to the
College and year of recommendation
Actions taken by the college to address
recommendations
Improvement results
The accreditation documents can be viewed at: http://www.spokanefalls.edu/College/Accreditation.aspx
Spokane Falls Community College’s regional accreditation was reaffirmed in January 2014 after a Year Seven Comprehensive site visit in
October 2013. This visit resulted in five recommendations:
RECOMMENDATION 1
The evaluation committee recommends
that the College articulate an
acceptable threshold of mission
fulfillment and ensure the effective
measurement of core themes and that
the core themes “individually manifest”
and “collectively encompass” the
College’s mission statement. Further
the core theme objectives and
verifiable indicators should be rigorous
and meaningful, should align to
The College has restructured its Accreditation
Steering Committee into the Institutional
Effectiveness Team (IE Team). This team is now
charged with assisting the Core Theme teams in
verifying that the indicators are rigorous and
meaningful, align to evaluate the
accomplishment of core themes, and inform
the evaluation of programs and services for
each core theme objective. Both the Core
Theme Teams and the IE Team have developed
charges to support these efforts.
1
A Core Theme Team Charge and Institutional
Effectiveness Team Charge were developed to
assist members in understanding roles and
support functions. The NWCCU mid-cycle rubric
was presented to each core theme team for selfreview. One area identified as needing
improvement was the documentation and
application of measures for statistical
significance. Those are now being applied
where appropriate.
evaluate the accomplishment of core
themes, and should holistically inform
the evaluation of programs and services
for each core theme objective
(Standards 1.A.2, 1.B.2; 3.B.3; 4.A, and
4.B).
Thresholds are being identified which balance
the accreditation standard of establishing a
minimum for mission fulfillment with that
which the College should and can achieve yet
are still aspirational. A reporting template was
developed to assist Core Theme teams.
RECOMMENDATION 2
The evaluation committee recommends
that the College revise its assessment of
faculty evaluation and professional
development to assure these processes
provide ongoing systematic collection
and analysis of meaningful, assessable,
and verifiable data—quantitative
and/or qualitative, as appropriate to its
indicators of achievement—as the basis
for evaluating the accomplishments of
its core theme objectives (Standards
1.B.2, 3.B.3; 4.A.1, and 4.B.1).
The College has incorporated the
recommendation into the work of Core Theme
1—Excellent Instruction, Objective 2--Faculty
professional development inform the
improvement of teaching and learning,
Indicator 1--Professional development activities
are reflected in classroom instruction and/or
demonstration of how they benefit student
learning.
A subgroup of Core Theme 1 developed
recommendations and processes to support
the collection and analysis of meaningful and
verifiable data.
 The subgroup is proposing a common
instrument be applied to selected faculty
development activities.
 The subgroup recommends to the Core
Theme I committee that a common
expectation of all funding be an
agreement by all participants funded by
these activities.
 The subgroup would accept responsibility
to coordinate, facilitate and document
participation, joined by others associated
with faculty development.
 The subgroup would develop a
spreadsheet to organize and collect
documentation.
2
The goal of this proposal is to assure sharing of
the benefits of funded faculty development
activities with others. The emphasis is on the
commitment to and participation in that sharing
rather than the actual documentation.
RECOMMENDATION 3
The evaluation committee recommends
that for each year of operation, the
College undergo an external financial
audit and that the results from such
audits, including findings and
management letter recommendations,
be considered in a timely, appropriate
and comprehensive manner by the
Board of Trustees (Eligibility
Requirement 19 and Standard 2.F.7).
Since receiving Recommendation 3, the College
has revised its financial statements to meet
generally accepted accounting principles and
contracted with the State Auditor’s Office
(SAO) to conduct independent financial audits
each year of operation. The first audit was
completed July of 2015.
In the NWCCU letter dated February 10th, 2015,
the Commission determined that SFCC’s Fall
2014 Ad Hoc Report addressing the
recommendation “still does meet the criteria for
accreditation.” The college has responded and
in its Ad Hoc Report dated October 15, 2015 it
offers evidence that Eligibility Standard 19 and
Standard 2.F.7 have now been met having had a
comprehensive external audit, and that the
college is now in full compliance. A response to
this Ad Hoc Report has not been received as of
the date of this annual report.
In the fall of 2014 the Chief Information Officer
(CIO) for the Community Colleges of Spokane
(CCS) contracted with Stafford & Associates, a
local research firm, to solicit input, opinions
and expertise from CCS students, faculty and
staff regarding information technologies.
Individual executive interviews were
conducted. Online surveys were made available
to all students and employees. Town hall
meetings were conducted in Colville, Pullman,
on each of the campuses and at the district
offices. Two focus groups were held
representing student government from each
campus. Two focus groups solicited input from
selected faculty members from throughout the
district. A focus group was dedicated to
members of the IT Governance Advisory
Council and two focus groups were held
representing IT staff members from throughout
the district.
Some issues identified are admittedly very
tactical in nature but some are clearly strategic
and paint a new vision. For tactical issues it’s
usually a function of funding or at least
prioritization. No surprise are the requests for
increased wireless access, extended hours of
support from the Service Support Desk and
earlier completion of student lab configurations
– at minimum before the term begins. Early
trends in strategic issues outline the need for
new thinking about how technologies are
funded, how the funds are allocated and how
some technology organizations are organized or
related. The completed CCS IT Plan will soon be
distributed to CCS and community stakeholders
and will be included in a separate report for
NWCCU in Fall of 2016.
RECOMMENDATION 4
The evaluation committee recommends
that the institution develop,
implement, and regularly review a
technology update and replacement
plan to ensure its technology
infrastructure is adequate to support its
operations, programs, and services
(Standard 2.G.8).
3
RECOMMENDATION 5
The evaluation committee recommends
that the College move aggressively to
revise and refine its system of direct
and authentic assessment that
appraises student accomplishment of
general education outcomes from
which are derived meaningful results
that provide clear direction for
curricular and instructional
improvement (Standard 4.A.3, 4.A.6,
4.B.1, and 4.B.2).
Significant progress has been made on
developing a robust process for assessing
general education learning outcomes. The
Institutional Teaching and Learning
Improvement Coordinating Committee (ITALIC)
has lead the efforts. In 2014-15, several key
tasks were completed:
 All distribution courses mapped to at least
one of five general education outcomes
 Developed five general education outcome
rubrics
 Faculty training/norming on rubric use
 Faculty training on signature assignment
development
 Pilot assessment of two outcomes-Communication and Diverse Perspectives
 Analysis of data (descriptive statistics and
correlational statistics)
4
ITALIC Presented first assessment results
(Communication and Diverse Perspectives
Learning Outcomes) to faculty. This year will
focus on improvement recommendations for
those outcomes. Interpretation of the results is
confounded by concerns about the rubrics which
were identified through the analysis. In 2015-16,
the general education outcomes for quantitative
literacy, Information literacy, and critical
thinking will be assessed. An all faculty
interdisciplinary discussion of the rubrics and
input session based on improving the rubrics
was held on October 27th, 2015, with over 80
participants.
Download