Getting Prepared:
Institutional Accreditation Review
2009-2010
Christine M. Ladisch
Vice Provost for Academic Affairs
• Review occurs every ten years
• Last review was in 1999-2000
• Purdue continually accredited since 1913
Purpose:
• Maintain the institution’s eligibility to receive
federal funds for student financial aid.
• Assure the quality of the institution and its
programs through enforcement of financial and
administrative standards.
• Encourage improvement of the institution and its
programs.
• Promote institutional accountability and provide
consumers with information about the institution.
Types of Accreditation
1) Institutional
•
•
regional
national (e.g., religious or trade schools)
2) Professional
•
focuses on a discipline
(e.g., engineering, business)
Who conducts institutional reviews?
There is no national, centralized “Ministry of
Education” to enforce academic standards.
The Higher Learning Commission which is part of the
North Central Association of Colleges and Schools has
legal authority from the Department of Education to
accredit colleges and universities.
HLC accreditation is based on a peer review process.
Regional Accreditation
North Central region – 19 states, 980 colleges/universities
Northwest
Western
North Central
Southern
Middle States
New England
Review Stages and Timeline
Fall 2006
HLC notifies Purdue to “get ready”.
Summer/Fall 2007
Purdue identifies self-study coordinator and
suggests potential site-visit dates.
Fall 2007-Summer 2009 Campus conducts self-study and prepares report.
late Fall 2009
early Spring 2010
Site visit by review team.
Spring 2010
Team report and university response reviewed by
HLC panel.
Summer 2010
Final decision by HLC. Periodic reporting to HLC
might be stipulated.
Changes in Process/Study since 2000:
•
Self-study criteria revised in 2005.
Much greater emphasis on assessment of student
learning, efforts toward institutional improvement,
and determining the impact of the institution on the
common good.
Focus of self-study is evaluative, rather than
descriptive.
The Self-Study’s 5 Criteria:
Is the institution fulfilling its
mission?
Student Learning
and Effective
Teaching
Preparation
for the Future
Mission &
Integrity
Acquisition,
Discovery,
Application of
Knowledge
Engagement &
Service
Assessment of Student Learning
• What do you want students to
learn?
• What did they learn and what
evidence do you have that they
learned it?
• Based on the evidence, what
needs to be changed to
improve learning and how are
you going to achieve these
changes?
Changes in Process/Study since 2000:
• Option to participate in HLC’s new Academy for
Assessment of Student Learning.
• Option to frame self-study around a special
emphasis.
• Self-study may be aligned with institutional
planning.
What hasn’t changed since 1999/2000 review?
• It is a HUGE amount of work.
• Must involve broad spectrum of campus
constituencies.
• Process requires strong presidential and board
support and involvement.
• Purdue will have the same HLC liaison –
Dr. Robert Appleson
Purdue’s 1999/2000 Self-Study Team
• Steering Committee – 12 people
• 5 Study Committees – 10-12 people each
(1 for each of the 5 criteria)
• Information/Data contacts – 38 people
1999-2000 Site Visit
• November 14 – 17, 1999
• 12 person team
• Met with 400 people in 40 settings,
including President and Board
Results from 1999/2000 Review
• Re-accredited for 10 years
• Provision – conduct site visit of GISMA
in Hanover, Germany (completed
November 2001)
http://www.purdue.edu/accreditation/
Advice from HLC in 1999/2000
• Initiate a strategic planning process as the new
President assumes the helm.
• Make the budgetary process increasingly transparent
through sharing info about and seeking comment on
sources of funds and funding priorities and allocations.
• Prepare to launch a major development campaign with
a goal no less lofty of other major public institutions.
Process should be driven by academic priorities and
guided centrally.
Advice from HLC continued….
• Continue commitment to sustained investment in
research infrastructure.
• Grow commercialization technology efforts.
• Centralize management of information technology
– hire a world-class CIO.
• Increase tuition/fees to support academic
programming.
Preparing for 2009/2010 Review
• 1999-2000 HLC advice heeded – and then some!
• Fall 2007: appoint leadership team and develop
plan for self-study.
• Fall 2007: determine theme special emphasis
for self-study.
The self-study emphasis:
• In-depth attention to a select group of issues critical
to the institution’s pursuit of continuous
improvement and educational excellence, especially
as they pertain to the achievement of its mission and
vision.
• Ideal if emphasis fits within strategic plans/goals.
• Must have prior HLC approval.
Advantages of a self-study emphasis:
• Tailors self-study to institutional needs and priorities.
• Increases campus interest in self-study.
• Report is focused and more interesting to the review team.
• Allows greater flexibility in selection of site review team.
Self-study emphasis examples:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Indiana University: globalization
Iowa State: undergraduate education
Michigan State: internationalization
Nebraska: strategic planning
Central Michigan: seeking national prominence
University of Chicago: research infrastructure
Ohio State: graduate and professional education
University of California Riverside: improving undergraduate
student engagement; the first year experience; learning
outcomes
Preparing for 2009/2010 continued…
• Develop campus plan for assessment of student
learning activities.
• Join HLC Assessment Academy.
• Learn from Purdue faculty serving as HLC peer
reviewers.
• Learn from recent reviews of Big 10/peer institutions.
• Inform and engage campus in review activities.
Summary
To be ready in 2009/2010, we need your help
and support with:
– learning assessment activities
– leadership for self-study working groups
– ideas for self-study emphasis
(1) faculty development
(2) student access and success