Instructions for Responding to a DEAC’s Chair’s Report
The institution should use the WORD file of the Chair’s Report as a template for its
response. The institution should insert its response beneath the “required actions” to any
“partially met” or “not met” findings. Its response should be in a different color or type
font so it is easily seen. The institution must explain and document what it has done to
come into compliance with DEAC’s minimum standards.
Optional: The institution may also want to comment on any of the “suggestions” made by
the Chair’s Report.
The institution should send an electronic copy of its response to Nan Ridgeway
(Nan.Ridgeway@DEAC.org), by the date indicated in the e-mail.
The institution should start its response with the “Findings” section of the Chair’s Report
(delete the Chair’s Cover page, list of Evaluators, Summary of the Visit, Summary
Findings”). It should add a new cover page (see below) and an introductory sentence, such
as: “XYZ University’s responses to standards that were deemed “partially met” or “not
met” are included in red:”
Response to the
Chair’s Report
on the
Examination
of
XYZ University
123 North 2nd Street
San Monica, CA 98800
Visitation Date:
March 1, 2015
Report Submitted:
May 9, 2015
Confidential
SAMPLE
II.B.
Appropriate Program Objectives – FINDINGS: Partially Meets Standard
Standard: The program objectives must be reasonably attainable through electronically delivered, online,
or other methods of distance study. Appropriate objectives include the development of skills, providing jobrelated training, the imparting of knowledge and information, the training in the application of knowledge
and skills, and the development of desirable habits and attitudes. Evaluation of the program is based on the
announced objectives and the success with which students achieve the objectives.
COMMENTS: (Note: this is copy from the Chair’s Report.) Objectives for the courses and learning
modules that make up the degree programs are stated in behavioral terms and are therefore measurable by
the assessment vehicles used by the institution. The objectives are reasonably attainable through the
distance learning method. Not all program objectives are comparable to those program objectives offered in
traditional or other appropriately accredited institutions. Several of the objectives for the Master’s level
courses are written at the lower levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy and are therefore not entirely appropriate for
courses delivered at the graduate level of university study. As an example, the objectives in the Leadership
in Organizations course do not adequately cover the critical content of the graduate level course.
REQUIRED ACTIONS: (Note: this is copy from the Chair’s Report.) In the graduate programs, present
objectives that require the students to do serious application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, written at
the higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.
RESPONSE: (Note: this is where you insert your response.) The objectives in the course referred to in the
Master of Science in Strategic Leadership program, Leadership in Organizations (BUS 545), have been
revised and all have been written at upper level Bloom’s Taxonomy to meet DEAC requirements. They are
now comparable to other course at regionally and nationally accredited universities.
DOCUMENTATION: (Note: this is where you insert your documentation.) Revised Course Objectives
for Leadership in Organizations are:
Students will be able to:
1. evaluate and categorize leadership and leadership theories
2. compare and contrast different managerial roles and activities required for managers, and
how they are changing
3. analyze the three-dimensional model of leadership behavior
4. make inferences about participative leadership, delegation, and empowerment
5. summarize approaches for managing a subordinate who has performance deficiencies
6. explain the process by which power is acquired or lost in organizations
7. outline the relevance of traits and skills in management
8. describe leader effectiveness
9. lead and manage change in a rapidly changing organizational climate
10. compare and contrast the contingency, charismatic, and transformational theories of
leadership
11. point out the important guidelines for leading in teams and decision groups
12. critique how coaching, mentoring, action learning, special assignments, simulations, and
360-degree feedback are used for management development
13. evaluate the value of an ethical leadership style
14. describe the most effective leadership styles given different situations