connecting the dots student learning outcomes commission on colleges achieving excellence committee

CONNECTING the DOTS

Student Learning

Outcomes

Commission on Colleges

Achieving Excellence Committee

EXAMPLE

The purpose of this set of slides is to “connect the dots” and (hopefully)

demonstrate the first listed function of the Achieving Excellence

Committee (AEC)

“1. Monitor compliance with, and ensure accountability for assessment-related requirements of SACS, THECB, and the federal government.”

This fall, ACC will submit its

Fifth-Year Interim Report

to SACS Commission on Colleges.

The Fifth-Year Interim Report includes

• ACC’s response to concerns of the last visiting committee– Board/President relationship

– Faculty credentials

And• evidence of compliance with selected

– Core Requirements, – Comprehensive Standards, – and Federal Requirements(an Abbreviated Compliance Certification)

Additionally, sometime prior to the opening of the Round Rock campus, ACC will submit a Substantive Change Prospectus.

The Substantive Change Prospectus includes

• Information related to the “change”

• A Faculty Roster, and

• An Abbreviated Compliance Certification

Both the Interim Report and the Prospectus will include an abbreviated Compliance Certification.

The following slides will illustrate ACC’s evaluation of compliance with Comprehensive Standard (CS) 3.3.1 in the Abbreviated Compliance Certification, as reported in our 2006 Prospectus for the South Austin Campus.

Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states

“The Institution

•identifies expected outcomes,

Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 states (cont.)

• Assesses the extent to which it achieves those outcomes,


• And provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of

the results


in each of the following areas:

3.3.1.1 Educational programs, to include student learning outcomes


3.3.1.2 Administrative support services

[have indirect relationship with students]


3.3.1.3 Educational support services”

[have direct relationship with students]

NOTE:

In 2006, Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 was stated slightly differently than it is now.

However, to illustrate AEC’s first listed function,

the following slides use the 1/2008 wording of the CS and the 2006 “response,” as

submitted in our

South Austin Campus Substantive Change Prospectus Abreviated Compliance

Certification.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.1 (educational programs to include student learning outcomes) were

• The Instructional Program Review (IPR) process– Including the IPR Quality Improvement Plan

• The U-LEAD process

From the SAC Prospectus re: Instructional Program Review

Faculty… use a broad range of data to determine the effectiveness of their program…

• standard information about the program’s students,

• enrollments,

• completions,

• faculty,

• budgets,

… data from the program’s SWOT (Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis

…other environmental impacts that may affect the program. (Example: [8] )

From the SAC Prospectus re: IPR Quality Improvement Plan

• The Quality Improvement Plan [9] is used to update curriculum as needed or to provide input to the Master Plan and budget development processes.

From the SAC Prospectus re: U-LEAD

…educational programs establish learning outcomes assessment plans for their departments:

a) [Faculty] define the unit purpose


b) state intended educational results and criteria it will use to determine whether those outcomes have been achieved;


c) define and implement the assessment methods, analyze and report results.


…[Develop] plans for improvement and

[an] analysis of how improvement plans have impacted the intended outcome.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.2 (administrative support services) were

• Internal College Survey (ICS)

• ICS Improvement Plans

From the SAC Prospectus re:

Internal College Survey (ICS)

• Staff members in administrative and educational support services use the results of the ICS in planning their quality improvement activities.


ICS Improvement Plan process

…units not meeting a minimum standard must develop an improvement plan.

In the SAC Prospectus, ACC reported the main processes used to ensure compliance with CS 3.3.1.3 (educational support services) were

Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures for

– Student Services areas

– Adult Education/GED/ESL

– Developmental Education


Educational Support Services

• The Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures identify quantitative goals and targets for the Intended Outcomes [2].



• Functional areas use the Core Indicators results to monitor and guide improvements to programs and services.



the Institutional Planning Committee reviews the results of the Core Indicators [4] and



…incorporates initiatives for improvements into the Master Plan development process [5].

YOUYOUJudge ComplianceJudge Compliance

…Identifies expected outcomes…Evidence Grade

Instructional Program Review

Quality Improvement Plan

U-LEAD

Internal College Survey

ICS Improvement Plan

Core Indicators/Effectiveness Measures

… Assesses the extent to which it achieves those outcomes …

Evidence Grade



U-LEAD




…and provides evidence of improvement based on the analysis of

the results…Evidence Grade



U-LEAD




connecting the dots student learning outcomes commission on colleges achieving excellence committee

Documents

comprehensive standard

sac prospectus

results comprehensive

monitor compliance

comprehensive standards

accs evaluation of compliance

programs students

educational programs