Academic Quality Improvement Program
HALF-DAY CONVERSATIONS
December 3, 4 & 10 2009
MCC Event Center
AQIP
Academic
Quality
Improvement
Program
HALF-DAY CONVERSATIONS
THIS MORNING’S AGENDA
9:30 – 8:45
8:45 – 9:15
9:15 – 10:15
10:15 – 10:30
10:30 – 12:30
12:30 - 1:00
Orientation & Overview
AQIP Status Report
“STRENGTHS” Conversation
Action Project Survey Results
“OPPORTUNITY” Conversation
* * LUNCH * *
Table Reports
FACILITATION TEAM
Chulindra Cooks
Jenny Kroninger
Brenda Phillips
Lisa Poma
Steve Robinson
Planning, Research & Quality
Academic Affairs
Human Resources
President’s Office
Planning, Research & Quality
from the Action Project Survey
“Explain what AQIP really is....I have a feeling that
those of you who have been around awhile
assume that everyone else knows what this is all
about and yet I bet if you did a survey, especially
of part-timers, you would be
surprised/disappointed...EX: Your logo does not
define the acronym -- AQIP. I would think that
every time anything that was sent out about AQIP
it should include, at the very least, what A.Q.I.P.
stands for---a mission statement or motto would
even be more beneficial. Just a thought.”
AQIP QUALITY
FRAMEWORK
3. Understanding
Students’ and Other
Stakeholders’ Needs
4.
5.
6.
8.
9.
Valuing People
Leading and Communicating
Supporting Institutional Operations
Planning Continuous Improvement
Building Collaborative Relationships
7. Measuring Effectiveness
1. Helping
Students Learn
2. Accomplishing
Other Distinctive
Objectives
THREE IMBEDDED IMPROVEMENT CYCLES
Academic Quality Improvement Program cycles of
continuous improvement
ACTION: Every Year
Action projects submitted to NCA and replaced as
completed.
STRATEGY: Every 4 Years
MCC maintains a Systems Portfolio, participates in a Strategy Forum, and
has a Systems Appraisal performed by peer reviewers
ACCREDITATION: Every 7 Years
Reaffirmation of accreditation as MCC demonstrates continuous improvement
and fulfillment of NCA criteria
What Is The AQIP Systems Portfolio?
• Part of the 4-Year AQIP “Strategy Cycle”
• 75-100 page (double-spaced) public portfolio
describing fundamental institutional systems
• Covers the nine AQIP Categories, describing
processes, results, & improvement in each
system
• Shows evidence that the institution continues
to meet the Higher Learning Commission's five
Criteria for Accreditation
AQIP Systems Portfolio Structure
• 9 sections, one on each of the AQIP Categories
• 3 types of questions:
– Process: What do we do? How do we do it?
– Results: What are the outcomes of what we do?
How do we know?
– Improvement: Have we improved? How do we
set targets/goals for improvement?
• 137 questions total
Large button on
the main AQIP
page links to our
2009 Systems
Portfolio, all of
the source
documentation,
and the HLC
Feedback Report.
Link goes to a
hypertext version
of our Portfolio,
which includes
multi-media and
short film segments
The PDF
version of our
Portfolio
contains all
the essential
information,
including
charts,
graphs, and
an index to
the HLC
Criteria for
accreditation.
Feedback Distribution by AQIP
Category
20
18
16
14
12
SS
10
S
O
8
OO
6
4
2
0
Cat 1
Cat 2
Cat 3
Cat 4
Cat 5
Cat 6
Cat7
Cat 8
Cat 9
The feedback report
was prepared in
response to our 2009
Systems Portfolio.
It was written by a
team of trained AQIP
Systems Appraisers.
We received the
feedback report in
early October.
The report consists of:
• Executive Summary
• Strategic Issues
• Accreditation Issues
• Specific feedback for
each AQIP Category.
Our report
confirms that we
are in compliance
with all AQIP and
HLC guidelines and
criteria (a “clean”
or “clear” report).
Three “Strategic
Issues” are
highlighted for
future
consideration.
No “Accreditation
Issues” were cited.
Question/
Item #
Rating of
“SS”
“S”
“O”
“OO”
Narrative
comment
about the
item based
on our
Systems
Portfolio
answer.
SS
S
Category 1: Helping Students Learn
O
OO
18
12
11
11
Category 3: Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ Needs
12
11
1
Category 4: Valuing People
15
17
1
Category 5: Leading and Communicating
15
12
1
Category 2: Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives
2
1
Category 6: Supporting Institutional Operations
1
11
12
1
Category7: Measuring Effectiveness
1
13
10
1
Category 8: Planning Continuous Improvement
1
13
13
1
Category 9: Building Collaborative Relationships
1
12
10
1
Items Identified as “SS” by Reviewers
1. Workforce and economic development
activities.
2. Community engagement in non-instructional
areas.
3. Comprehensive public safety and crime
prevention program.
4. ITS merger.
5. 7-step CQI process.
6. Participation in MACRAO.
Items Identified as “OO” by Reviewers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Gather evidence of students’ skill mastery from employers and
higher education institutions that receive them.
Collect and analyze satisfaction data from non-student
stakeholders.
Improve the employee survey system to evaluate employee
satisfaction.
Collect and analyze measures of MCC’s leadership and
communication.
Improve and greater utilize the student satisfaction survey.
Focus more on results of effectiveness measures and
internal/external targets and benchmarks.
Collect and analyze the effectiveness of MCC’s planning processes.
Collect quantitative and qualitative measures of how MCC’s
partnerships add value to the institution.
Degree Audit AP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Identify area
for
improvement
Define
current
situation
Analyze
current
situation
Develop an
improvement
theory
Implement
best
strategies
Monitor
results
Adjust,
standardize, or
plan further
Professional Development AP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Identify area
for
improvement
Define
current
situation
Analyze
current
situation
Develop an
improvement
theory
Implement
best
strategies
Monitor
results
Adjust,
standardize, or
plan further
Experiential Education AP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Identify area
for
improvement
Define
current
situation
Analyze
current
situation
Develop an
improvement
theory
Implement
best
strategies
Monitor
results
Adjust,
standardize, or
plan further
Data Integration/Faculty Assignments AP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Identify area
for
improvement
Define
current
situation
Analyze
current
situation
Develop an
improvement
theory
Implement
best
strategies
Monitor
results
Adjust,
standardize, or
plan further
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The primary objective of this project is to
implement credit and non-credit assignments systems that promote
data integration within or, when necessary, in conjunction with
Datatel.
SPONSORS: Amy Fugate, Mark Kennedy
TEAM MEMBERS: Cheryl Bassett, Ken Boldig, Bernadette Coleman,
Crystal Croffe, Sylvia Green, Phyllis Holbrook, Gail Ives, Joe King
Wendy LaCroix, Patricia Markowicz, Ethel Mason, Jennifer McDonald,
Brenda Phillips, Lynne Reynolds, Dolores Sharpe, Chuck Thiel, Linda
Uren
“STRENGTHS”
CONVERSATION
Guidelines for this activity can be found
on the GREEN SHEET.
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
In preparation for today’s event, an anonymous,
online survey was conducted November 6 -16,
2009. Employees were asked to rank the relative
importance of MCC’s 7 Overarching Strategic Goals
as they are found in the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan.
Employees were then asked to provide suggestions
for potential AQIP Action Projects.
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
Importance of MCC’s 2007-2012
Overarching Strategic Goals
Perception Among Employees
AQIP/HLC Reviewers’ Comments
MCC Employees’ Comments
“OPPORTUNITY”
CONVERSATION
Guidelines for this activity can be found
on the PINK SHEET.
Academic Quality Improvement Program
THANK YOU!