SACS Reaffirmation Update to
University Senate:
October 10, 2011
Dr. Heidi M. Anderson
Interim Vice President,
Institutional Research, Planning, & Effectiveness
http://www.uky.edu/SACS/
SACS
Southern
Association of
Colleges and Schools
www.sacscoc.org
2
SACS
• 2001 significantly changed it’s approach to
accreditation
• Expects an institution has made a
commitment to:
– Focus on student learning
– Enhance the quality of it’s educational programs
– Engage in continuous improvement
– Comply with the SACS Principles of Accreditation
3
Steps in the Reaffirmation Process
• SACS uses a multi-phased process
– Off-Site Review of Compliance Certification
• Compliance Certificate – institutional document
demonstrating compliance with standards
– On-Site Review of Quality Enhancement Plan
(QEP)
• Review team visits the university, to evaluate and
determine the feasibility of the QEP and review areas
of non-compliance as noted by off-site review
committee
4
Reaffirmation Process Timeline
Institution submits:
Sep 10, 2012
Compliance Certification (CC)
(all standards except QEP*)
Commission
Off-Site Peer Review of CC
Nov 6-9, 2012
Quality Enhancement Plan
(QEP)
On-Site Review of QEP and any
non-compliant CC
Reviews -- Dec 7-10, 2013
Institution submits:
Jan 2013
Commission
Apr 9-11, 2013
Commission
5
The Compliance Certification Report
• Institution makes the case for compliance
for each
– Core Requirement
– Comprehensive Standard
– Federal Requirement
• Case is supported with documentation,
relevant data, and an explanatory narrative
• Non-compliance judgment on Core
Requirement results in automatic sanction
7
Areas Covered
• Mission, Governance and Administration
• Institutional Effectiveness
• All Educational Programs (Undergraduate,
Graduate, Professional)
• Faculty
• Library and Learning Resources
• Student Affairs and Services
• Financial Resources
• Physical Resources
8
Acceptable QEP
• CR 2.12 – includes an institutional process for
identifying key issues emerging from
institutional assessment and focuses on
learning outcomes and/or the environment
supporting student learning and accomplishing
the mission of the institution
• CS 3.3.2 – demonstrates institutional capability;
includes broad-based involvement; and
identifies goals and a plan to assess their
achievement
9
Critical Areas
Requirement
or Standard
Compliance Area
2.8
Faculty qualifications
2.5
Institutional effectiveness (strategic plans and
improvement action plans) in all areas
2.12
Acceptable QEP based on key issues emerging
from student learning assessment results
3.3.1.1
3.7.1
Student learning improvement based on
assessment results
Faculty competence/credentials/transcripts
3.12
Substantive change
10
Update on Faculty Credentials
CR 2.8 and CS 3.7.1
Faculty Competence:
What Does SACS Look for?
• Institution employs competent faculty
qualified to accomplish the missions
• Institution gives primary consideration to the
highest earned degree in the discipline
• Institution also considers
undergrad/graduate degrees, work
experiences, professional licensure,
certifications, honors/awards, documented
excellence in teaching, other…
12
Documenting faculty credentials for the
SACS Faculty Roster
• 2002 SACS Reaffirmation UK was cited noncompliant as related to faculty competence
3.7.1
• In response, UK developed Faculty Database
(FDB) under the leadership of Diane Gagel
• FDB allows UK to make faculty credentialing
checks at time of hire and each semester at
the course level
13
Documenting faculty credentials for the
SACS Faculty Roster
• SACS expects us to provide evidence about how
we determine the competencies of faculty:
– Review transcripts (college and provost level review)
– Assign CIP codes to each faculty member’s graduate
degrees and each course taught by the faculty
person
– Department chairs provide a justification for each
instructor and teaching assignment that does not
satisfy SACS logic (terminal degree, etc.)
– Validate international transcripts of faculty
14
Assistance of Dr. Jennifer Skaggs, Kathryn Wong, & Tomeia Luke
15
• College of Arts & Sciences
• College of Law
• College Agriculture
• College of Medicine
• College of Nursing
• College of Business & Economics
• College of Pharmacy
• College of Communications & Information
Studies
• College of Public Health
• College of Dentistry
• College of Social Work
• College of Design
• Graduate School (Martin School, Patterson
School)
• College of Education
• College of Engineering
• College of Fine Arts
• College of Health Sciences
95-100 % complete for instructor
transcripts from Fall 2010 through
Fall 2011
Pending some instructor transcripts:
…Request for originals (where possible)
…New instructors incoming for Fall 2011
…Transcript requiring translation
16
College of Arts & Sciences:
Debbie Burton, Nikki Noe (student worker).
College of Fine Art:
Geraldine Maschio, Deborah Colston.
College of Agriculture:
Lisa Collins, Brooke Stone, Ruth Cremeans.
College of Health Sciences:
Sharon Stewart, Rena Murphy, Keturah Taylor.
College of Business & Economics:
Debbie O’Daniel, Melissa Huffman.
College of Law:
Destiney Clark, Jason Souders.
College of Communications & Information Studies:
Charlene Monaghan, Lousetta Carlson, Maggie Chapman, Nathan Stevens,
Konstantin Tovstiadi.
College of Medicine:
Sandra Jaros, Charlotte Baker, Stephen Welch.
College of Dentistry:
Barbara Dickson.
College of Dentistry:
Ginny Miller, Kimberly Light.
College of Education:
Tricia Adolph, Keri Puckett.
College of Engineering:
Mary Watts, Libby Weir, LynnTiley, Sue Mills,
Betty Berry, Diane Mier, Linda Baldwin,
Peter Hayman, Kathy Kotora, Kenny Blair.
College of Nursing:
Nancy Mcdevitt.
College of Pharmacy:
Mandy Bucy.
College of Public Health:
Rebecca Flanagan.
College of Social Work:
Heather Bosworth, Chelsea Cushing, Karen Badger, Gary Trumble.
Graduate School (Martin School, Patterson School):
Patricia Whitlow, Cheryl Estes.
Additional assistance for scanning of oversized transcripts, or transcripts
requiring color and contrast adjustments:
Mary Lou Cahal, Academic Technology Group, UKIT.
17
Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)
Focus on enhancing student learning or
the environment for student learning
CR 2.12 and CS 3.3.2
QEP: focus on student learning
• Co-leaders Drs. Snow, Sellnow and a team
canvassed campus last year to announce QEP and
get “Big Ideas” for potential topics
• “Big Ideas”
“White Papers”
Topic:
• “Multimodal Communication Across the
Curriculum” MCXC
• QEP Development Team is defining the learning
outcomes, writing the QEP Plan, working to
ensure campus-wide awareness of the topic, etc.
19
Institutional Effectiveness
CR 2.5 and CS 3.3.1
On-going, integrated,
institution-wide, systematic review,
continuous improvement
Institutional Effectiveness:
Strategic Planning & Assessment Update
• Leadership of Dr. Mia Alexander-Snow and
Tara Rose
• Systematic review of over 190 unit strategic
plans and annual progress reports
• Systematic review of over 250 degree
programs student learning assessment plans
and the improvement action plans
• October 31, 2011 deadline for 2010-2011
• May 25, 2012 deadline for 2011-12
21
Institutional Effectiveness:
Student Learning Assessment Update
• SACS: The institution identifies expected
outcomes assesses the extent to which it
achieves these outcomes and provides evidence
of improvement based on analysis of results.
• 250+ degree programs, criteria:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Outcomes
Methods of Assessment
Benchmark/Target
Results
Analysis
Improvement Action Plan
22
Student Learning Assessment:
Improvement Action Plan (IAP)*
2009-2010 for Example Degree Program
Discipline
Degree
Action to Date
Example A
Master
Complete
Example B
Bachelor
Started but incomplete
Example C
Master
IAP hasn’t been started
Example D
Doctorate
IAP hasn’t been started
Example E
Certificate
Assessment Plan and
Improvement Action Plan Missing
* IAP format in Blackboard Outcomes
24
Institutional Effectiveness: Strategic Plans:
as Captured in Blackboard Outcomes
70
64
Number of Units
60
50
45
40
No Activity
30
In Progress
20
10
14
1 3 3
7
4 5
0
President
EVPFA
0
4 6
Provost
10 12
13
Complete
Educational Academic
Support
Areas
25
SACS Team Next Steps
• Reviewing the narratives and evidence for the 16 CR
and 56 CS
• Preparing SACS Faculty Roster for UK Internal Review
of Fall 2011 teaching assignments
• Linking faculty transcripts to faculty credentials data
in electronic system
• Providing an overview/update of SACS Reaffirmation
process to various groups as requested (i.e., Senate,
BOT)
• Editing the Compliance Certification report
• Resolving noncompliance instances based on internal
review
26
Colleges: Items Needed 2011
Activities
Due Date
Type I TA Fall Assignments
October 15, 2011
Fall 2011 Course Syllabi
October 15, 2011
Strategic Plans, Assessment
Improvement Action Plans
October 31, 2011
Faculty Credentials Completed
for Fall 2011 courses
November 30, 2011
Update faculty CVs
December 2011
27
College: Items Needed 2012
Activities
Due Date
Faculty CVs collected by
January 24, 2012
Winter and Spring 2012
Course Syllabi
March 1, 2012
Faculty credentials completed
for Winter and Spring 2012
March 30, 2012
Strategic Plans and Assessment
Improvement Action Plans for
2011-2012
May 25, 2012
28
Substantive Change
CS 3.12
Procedure, Timing, Reporting, Type
of Report
Compliance Certification Deadlines
Activity
Final Approval of the
Compliance Certification
Report from Leadership
Team
Compliance Certification
Mock Review
Submission of Compliance
Certification Report to
SACS
On-Site Visit
Date
February 1, 2012
March 25-31, 2012
September 10, 2012
April 9-11, 2013
30
Campus Awareness:
Overview of SACS
• Awareness about ‘new’ SACS process and UK
status
–
–
–
–
–
College of Fine Arts: August 26, 2011
UCAPP: October 3, 2011
University Senate: October 10, 2011
Board of Trustees December, 2011
Others ??
• Awareness about QEP process – ongoing
• Awareness about Institutional Effectiveness,
Student Assessment
Appreciation to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mia Alexander-Snow
Diane Gagel
Tomeia Luke
Connie Ray
Tara Rose
Jennifer Skaggs
Deanna Sellnow
Diane Snow
Kathryn Wong
And a host of others .....
32
Questions?