UIU’s Academic Quality Improvement Program

(AQIP)

Open Forum ICategories 1 And 4

AQIP is an accreditation reaffirmation process based on continuous improvement.

• UIU was accepted into AQIP in 2005• HLC accreditation is either through AQIP or

PEAQ (traditional self-report & site visit on 10 year cycle)

• AQIP institutions conduct and annually report on AQIP Action Projects, and participate in a lock-step reaffirmation process

• The AQIP reaffirmation process has nine steps; UIU is currently at step 7 – Systems Appraisal

8—Participation in Quality

Checkup Site Visit

9—Reaffirmation of

Accreditation

UIU Accepted into AQIP

4/27/05

1—Strategy Forum

2—Official Declaration of Action Projects

3—Submission of Annual Updates

4—Retirement of Engrafted Action

Projects

5—Declaration of New Action Projects

6—Submission of Systems Portfolio

7—Strategy Forum to Complete

Systems Appraisal

10/2005

12/2005

Annually, September

Annually, when process is fully engrafted

Annually, April

2012-2013

MAY 2010

9/2009

UIU and the AQIP Cycle

Systems Appraisal via AQIP Strategy Forum

Strategy Forum - focused on developing and fine-tuning processes for continuous organizational learning.

• UIU submitted Systems Portfolio to HLC/AQIP• AQIP reviewers provided Systems Appraisal

Feedback Report– Strengths and opportunities for improvement were

identified– AQIP Steering Committee has homework to

complete with your help

The 2009-2010 AQIP Steering Committee (ASC):

• Don Aungst, CFO • Dave Chown, CAO • Scott Figdore, Professor of Science• DeWayne Frazier, SVP International Programs • Linda Haines, Assoc VP Academic Extension• Doug McReynolds, Bissell Prof of English• Mari Molseed, Professor of Sociology• Rich Patrick, Dean of Faculty• Deena Serra, Administrative Assistant

Strategy Forum Team

• Mr. Bob Firth – Board Chair• Dr. Alan Walker - President• Mr. Don Aungst - CFO• Dr. Dave Chown - CAO• Dr. Rich Patrick – Dean of Faculty• Dr. Linda Haines – Assoc VP for AE• Dr. DeWayne Frazier – Senior VP IP• Dr. Scott Figdore – Professor of Science• Dr. Mari Molseed - Alternate

AQIP Systems AppraisalAccreditation Issue 1

“…UIU’s Portfolio consistently lacks evidence of progress toward the development of … processes and presentation of results. The lack of sufficient documentation of effective teaching and learning is of particular concern…”

AQIP Systems AppraisalAccreditation Issue 2

“…adequate human resources are not available to meet the academic, support, and administrative needs of its diverse, geographically dispersed student populations…”

“Fewer than 15% of UIU students are enrolled on the resident-oriented Fayette campus. Yet, much of UIU’s efforts … appear driven by needs identified for the Fayette campus.”

Category One: Helping Students LearnProcesses

1P11: How do you define, document and communicate across your organization your expectations for effective teaching and learning?

UIU S HLC Outstanding Opportunity (OO)

1P11 feedback: Because of the considerable reliance upon adjunct faculty, documentation of faculty evaluations and availability of faculty development programs for all classes of faculty at all locations is needed to support evaluation of effective teaching

Category One: Helping Students LearnResults

1R1: What measures of your students’ learning and development do you collect and analyze regularly?UIU S HLC OO

Feedback: UIU acknowledges the challenges it faces moving from a teaching-based institution to a learning-based culture. One of the challenges is the development of assessment criteria and data-driven processes to support the justification for and results of proposed changes. The development and use of data-driven processes will provide objective evidence of the benefits to stakeholders of implementing changes

Category Four: Valuing PeopleProcesses

4P8-9: How do you determine training needs, align employee training with short- and long-range planning, and how does it strengthen your instructional and non-instructional programs and services? How do you train and develop all faculty, staff and administrators to contribute fully and effectively throughout their career? How do you reinforce this training?

UIU S & ? HLC both OO

Feedback: UIU does not demonstrate the use of a standardized and systematic approach to identification of training needs for the various employee segments at all campus locations. As a result, it is not evident that current personnel’s training contributes to or is effective in achieving UIU’s strategic or operational goals.

Category Four: Valuing PeopleProcesses

4P10: How do you design and use your personnel evaluation system? How do you align this system with your objectives for both instructional and non-instructional programs and services?

UIU ? HLC OO

Feedback: UIU does not have a university-wide evaluation system aligned with goals and objectives set forth in the strategic plan. Currently each academic division and department follows its own personnel evaluation system.

Category Four: Valuing PeopleResults

4R1-3: What measures of valuing people do you collect and analyze regularly? What are your performance results in managing people? What evidence indicates the productivity and effectiveness of your faculty, staff and administrators in helping you achieve your goals?

UIU all ?’s HLC all OO’s

Feedback : Neither processes nor data are presented to demonstrate how the work of the HRS Team or administrative personnel contribute to structuring and maintaining a workforce needed to serve the needs of diverse and geographically dispersed students and stakeholders.

Category Four: Valuing PeopleResults

4R4: How do the results for the performance of your processes for Valuing People compare with the performance results of other higher education organizations and, if appropriate, of organizations outside of higher education?UIU O HLC OO

Feedback: UIU recognizes the need to develop a benchmarking process to compare internal results to those of external/peer institutions and where applicable institutions outside of higher education. Once a process is in place, UIU will have increased capability to identify continuous improvement opportunities based on best practices of both peer and non-peer organizations.