Academic Quality Improvement Program

Higher Learning Commission

AQIP Portfolio Development and Accreditation

Pamela Miller, Ph.D.August 15, 2011

Session Description

The College’s third AQIP portfolio will be submitted in May for review

by the Higher Learning Commission for reaccreditation purposes. 

Category teams have been working since February to document how

the College meets the required HLC performance criteria in nine of

the major systems employed to accomplish its mission and objectives. 

This session will provide an overview of the AQIP process, the on-

going portfolio development work, and institutional challenges to

continuous improvement.   Learn how you might become involved in

AQIP related quality initiatives and share your thoughts regarding

potential future Action Projects that the College might undertake.

Definition of Accreditation“Accreditation is a process of external quality review created and used by higher education to scrutinize colleges, universities and programs for quality assurance and quality improvement. In the U.S., accreditation is carried out by private, nonprofit organizations designed for this specific purpose.” - Judith S. Eaton, President, CHEA

• Roles of Accreditationo Assuring quality

• Quality of faculty, curriculum, student services, etc.• Fiscal stability

– Institutional mission is central to quality judgments

o Access to federal and state funds• Financial Aid• Grants

o Engendering private sector confidence• Individuals• Employers• Foundations

o Easing transfer between institutions

Maintaining Accreditation• All institutions accredited by the Higher Learning Commission must

demonstrate how they meet the HLC’s Five Criteria for Accreditationo Criterion One: Mission and Integrity

o Criterion Two: Preparing for the Future

o Criterion Three: Student Learning and Effective Teaching

o Criterion Four: Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of

Knowledge

o Criterion Five: Engagement and Service

• Each Criterion has three elements: Criterion Statement, Core

Components, and Examples of Evidence

• The Criteria are currently under revision (will not impact this

portfolio submission)

HLC Accreditation Programs/Models

• PEAQ - the Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality

• AQIP - the Academic Quality Improvement Program

• Pathways - a new model that will replace PEAQ in

2012-13o Standard Pathway

o AQIP Pathway

o Open Pathway

• San Juan College adopted AQIP as its model for

reaffirming its accreditation in November 2000

SJC Accreditation History

Year of Last PEAQ Comprehensive Evaluation: 1993 -

1994

Year of Admission to AQIP: 11/20/2000

Year of Last Reaffirmation of Accreditation: 2007 -

2008

Year of Next Reaffirmation of Accreditation: 2014 -

2015

Year of Last System Appraisal: 2007 - 2008

Year of Next System Appraisal: 2011 - 2012

Due Date of Next Systems Portfolio: 6/1/12Source: HLC Statement of Affiliation

About AQIP

• AQIP is a quality improvement model that focuses on the

key systems and processes an institution uses to achieve its

mission

• AQIP’s nine categories provide a framework for institutions

to examine their key processes

• AQIP’s core processes are structured in a 7-year cycleo Strategy Forum

o Action Projects with Annual Updates

o Systems Portfolio

o Systems Appraisal

o Quality Checkup Site Visit

o Reaffirmation of Accreditation

About AQIP

Action - Annual Cycle

• Action Project Updates (Sept)

• Feedback

• Incorporation into Systems Portfolio

Strategy - Four-Year Cycle

• Strategy Forum

• Systems Portfolio

• Appraisal Feedback Report

Accreditation – Seven-Year Cycle

• Check-up Visit

• Reaffirmation

Systems Portfolio

• Systems Portfolio – consists of an Organizational Overview and

examines each of the major systems employed to accomplish the

organization’s mission and objectives

• Nine Categories:

o Helping Students Learn

o Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives

o Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ Needs

o Valuing People

o Leading and Communicating

o Supporting Institutional Operations

o Measuring Effectiveness

o Planning Continuous Improvement

o Building Collaborative Relationships

The AQIP Categories

The AQIP Category Framework

• Process Standardso 8P4. How do you coordinate and align your planning processes,

organizational strategies, and action plans across your organization’s various levels?

• Results Standardso 8R2. What are your performance results for accomplishing your

organizational strategies and action plans?

• Improvements Standardso 8I1. What recent improvements have you made in this category? How

systematic and comprehensive are your processes and performance results for Planning Continuous Improvement?

SJC AQIP Schedule

• Action Projects

• Systems Portfolio

• Systems Appraisal

• Strategy Forum

• Quality Check-up Visit

• Reaffirmation of Accreditation

– Three New Actions Projects October 1, 2011

– November 1, 2011June 1, 2012

– Sept/Oct, 2012

– Spring 2013

– Fall 2013 or Spring 2014

– AY 2014 - 2015

Visit the SJC website to view AQIP documents

SJC 2012 Systems Portfolio

• Shared DriveMy Computer, Tools, Map Network DriveDrive:           <choose an available drive letter)

Folder: \\link\aqip

Finish

SJC Portfolio Category Leaders and Liaisons

Category 1 Helping Students Learn Sher Hruska, Dave Eppich, Lisa Wilson, Stacey Bradley

Category 2 Accomplishing Other Distinct ObjectivesSher Hruska, Liesl Dees, Ken Kernagis

Category 3 Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ Needs

Dave Eppich, Tim Warren, Susan Grimes, Heather JamesCategory 4 Valuing People

Dave Eppich, Stacey Allen, Skylar Matsen

Category 5 Leading and CommunicatingMike Tacha, Kimberly Mathes, Sam Bachert

Category 6 Supporting Institutional OperationsRussell Litke, Tim Warren, Karen King

Category 7 Measuring EffectivenessRussell Litke, Dianne Garcia, Tim Schroeder

Category 8 Planning Continuous ImprovementRussell Litke, Laurie Gruel, Shelley Pickett

Category 9 Building Collaborative RelationshipsSher Hruska, Nancy Shepherd, Bill Lewis, Machell Day

SJC 2012 Systems Portfolio

• Category Team Members

• Process and Timeline

o Phase I – Gap Analysis (Feb – Apr 2011)

o Phase II – Standards Analysis (May – July 2011)

o Phase III – Draft Portfolio (Aug 2011 – Jan 2012)

o Phase IV – Stakeholder Review (Feb – Apr 2012)

o Phase V – Submission (May 2012)

Current Status

• Phase I – Gap Analysis <COMPLETED>o Identification of critical gaps

• O’s and OO’s from 2008 Systems Appraisal• Review HOT Teams Top 13 (critical issues) and Category

Reports

• Phase II – Standards Analysis <IN PROCESS>

Identification – Exploration – Documentation

o build upon gap analysis and expand focus to include all category

standards

o identify process owners

o request information from process owners (AQIP Category Worksheet)

o select activities to highlight in the portfolio (strengths)

o review current Action Projects

Institutional Challenges

• Changes in leadership

• Institutional commitment to AQIP and continuous

improvement principles

• Lack of clearly defined decision making structure

• Lack of strategic plan and concurrent strategic planning

process

• Limited use of data in decision-making

• Lack of process documentation

• Limited faculty participation

• Continued changes in leadership…

Institutional Challenges

• Changes in leadership

• Continued changes in leadership…

• Departure of Dr. Spencer and appointment of Interim

President Tacha

• Changes in Board of Trustees

• Departure of Dr. Brown, AVP Institutional Resources

• Change in ELT membership

• Departure of Mr. Jones, VP Administrative Services

• Departure of Linda Baker, Category 5 Liaison

• Departure of David Penrose, Category 5 Liaison

Institutional Challenges

• Institutional commitment to AQIP, continuous improvement

principles

• Lack of clearly defined decision making structure

• Lack of strategic plan and concurrent strategic planning process

• Limited of use of data in decision-making

• Meeting with ELT, SPOT members, and AQIP Category Teams 5, 7

and 8 took place on June 21 to begin to address the critical issues

outlined in the 5/20/11 AQIP update provided to ELT (organizational

structure, use of data in decision making).   o A SPOT Tactical Team has been charged to work with the TSO to conduct

research and make recommendations to this larger group regarding

organizational structure and decision making.  This report is due in

September. 

• ELT has asked that Dr. Hruska and Dr. Miller facilitate a Board

Work Session on our AQIP portfolio development work. 

Institutional Challenges

• Lack of process documentation

• Institutions accomplish work through the processes they

use

• Process improvements are central to achieving

performance improvements

• Processes that are formal, prescribed, and documented are

more likely to be improved upon

• Formalized processes tend to produce consistent results

Opportunities for Involvement

• Opportunities for involvement:o Category team member

o Provide requested information

o Review documents on shared drive

and provide feedback to teams

o Participate in open forums

o Serve on the writing team

Questions?Pamela Miller, Ph.D.Associate Vice President for Learningmillerp@sanjuancollege.edu 566-3217