Campus Updates: Middle States Accreditation
The updates below outline activities undertaken as part of the self-study process required for accreditation by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Updates will be added periodically as we prepare for a visit by the Middle States Peer Evaluation Team during the Spring 2020 semester.
Comments or questions may be addressed to associate provost Dr. Len Collelli at email@example.com.
Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 Activities: A Review
February 26, 2020
Our Middle States Self-Study work groups continued reviewing, editing and revising self-study chapter narratives. The Leadership Team (Len Colelli, Steve Atkins and Justin Hackett) and work-group co-chairs revised chapters all Standards chapters, and line editors (Laura Tuennerman and Melanie Blumberg) completed initial and follow-up edits on all chapters of the self-study report.
In October 2019, we learned that our self-study evidence exhibits might need to be uploaded into a recently created Middle States Evidence Portal rather than the MS SharePoint inventory we had created. This was confirmed during the December 2019 Middle States annual conference. Using the Evidence Portal required format changes for over 370 evidence exhibits supporting our seven self-study chapters.
Dr. Kathryn Foster, president of the College of New Jersey and chair of our Middle States peer review committee, visited our campus on November 4, 2019. The purpose of her visit was to learn about our University and campus, establish logistics (e.g., hotel, the committee’s base of operations on campus, etc.), and meet with various campus constituents: President Jones, the Council of Trustees, President’s Cabinet, Self-Study Steering Committee, deans, staff members, and students , whom she met for lunch in the Gold Rush.
The primary message from our team chair was that “the process is the product,” meaning the quality and dedication of all involved in planning, researching, writing and editing the self-study report will reflect the quality of the final self-study. President Foster also indicated that our self-study should identify our strengths, challenges and opportunities for institutional improvement/innovation, and these could inform our next strategic plan. Based on that advice, the conclusions of each self-study chapter provide this information. President Foster also emphasized the important role of the Council of Trustees in University governance and her expectation of their participation during the peer review visit.
The Compliance Committee continued its work on the Middle States Compliance Report, which also was completed in early February 2020. The Compliance Report was submitted in the Standard II, Criterion 1 section of our Middle States Evidence Inventory. A duplicate copy of the Compliance Report also was included in the Standard II, Criterion 8 evidence inventory.
The executive summary for the self-study report was written in January 2020 and revised in early February. Once completed, the combined self-study report exceeded the 100 single-spaced page Middle States requirement by about 80 pages, so it required significant copy-editing. Our copy-editing team (Christine Kindl, Justin Hackett, Steve Atkins, Alice Jenkins and Ashley Teets) diligently worked during the first week of February to reduce the size of the final self-study report to 99 single-spaced pages.
The completed Self-Study Report was uploaded in the Middle States Portal on the evening of February 9 and evidence inventory exhibits were uploaded the following day. Links to the 2020 Self-Study Report, Evidence Inventory, Compliance Report, and end-of-chapter Opportunities for Improvement and Innovation are provided here and at our Accreditation Webpage.
Soon after uploading the self-study and evidence in the Middle States portal, our Oversight Team prepared a Middle States Visit Educational Presentation to prepare the campus community for the visit. As of this writing, the presentation has been provided to all college councils, the Provost’s Council consisting of academic department chairs, Student Government, Academic Success Staff, and four academic departments. Additional campus-wide presentations (including the Council of Trustees March Quarterly Meeting) have been and are expected to be scheduled during the lead-up to our March 22-25 peer review visit. A link to this presentation is also provided at our Accreditation webpage.
Updates to other critical accreditation-related webpages have also occurred during the spring 2020 semester. A link to Assessment Results on our Strategic Plan webpage illustrates substantial success of our strategic plan. A new section was added to our Shared Governance webpage illustrating the current Shared Governance structure (below).
This model now includes the four recently added assessment committees and the governance relationship of these committees to the institutional planning and budgeting process per Middle States Requirement of Affiliation #10. Additionally, our Assessment website is currently being updated to align all assessment handbooks and processes to the recent implementation of our Nuventive digital assessment platform.
Spring and Summer Activities: A Review
August 29, 2019
Our Middle States Self-Study team had very active 2019 spring and summer terms. Most activity centered around reviewing, editing, and revising self-study chapter narratives. The Self-Study Oversight Team (Colelli, Atkins, Hackett) reviewed initial drafts of the seven Self-Study chapters and provided recommendations for improvement. Three of the chapters (I, VI and VII) were revised by chapter work teams, were forwarded to our two self-study editors for their review and are currently undergoing additional revision by the chapter working groups. The remainder of the Self-Study chapters( II, III, IV and V) are currently undergoing initial revisions from Oversight Team reviews and will soon be forwarded to the self-study editorial team for their initial reviews.
The Compliance Committee has been working on our Middle States Compliance Report which will document evidence of compliance with seven of the fifteen Requirements of Affiliation. The verification of the remaining eight Requirements of Affiliation is occurring within the narratives of the seven Self-Study Chapters as indicated in Table 2 page 5 of our Self-Study Design Document. The Compliance Report will be uploaded in the Middle States Portal near the end of the fall 2019 semester.
A revised “Academic Integrity Policy” and new “Verification of Student Identity Policy” were developed during the spring 2019 semester further strengthen our Compliance Report. The draft policies were shepherded through the academic portion of the shared governance system for feedback and multiple revisions. Discussion and feedback occurred with our four college/school councils, the University-Wide Curriculum Committee, the APSCUF Executive Committee (and Meet & Discuss forum) and finally, the President’s Cabinet where the policies received final approval in July and have been posted in the “Academic Policies” section of the University Policies website.
The Cal U periodic program review process was revised during the spring 2019 semester to align with the related PASSHE 1986-04-A policy revision that occurred in July 2018. New program review report templates were also developed to better align our program review evaluation criteria with the July 2018-revised PASSHE Procedure/Standard Number 2018-35: “Review of Academic Programs and Programs in Support of the Student Experience.” One template requires a “Full” program review every five years for non-accredited academic programs and the other template requires a “Modified” program review for accredited programs primarily based on their unique accreditation cycles. The program performance criteria for these templates were aligned with the PASSHE policy/standard AND the Robert C. Dickeson model for prioritizing academic programs and services.
The revised program review process (timelines and the templates) were discussed and improved with feedback from our academic shared governance process including all college/school councils, the Deans/Provost Council, and the Provost/Senior VP for Academic Affairs. These documents will soon be added to the “Program Review Procedures & Timelines” section of the University Assessment website. Additional feedback for the revised process occurred with a pilot study in May and June 2019 of four program reviews of accredited programs using the modified program review template. The results of this pilot contributed to a further revision both the “Full” and “Modified” program review templates.
During the Spring 2019 semester, we administered and analyzed data from a number of assessment surveys to inform various areas of our Middle States Self-Study Report. These surveys included the HEDS Diversity and Equity Campus Climate Survey, National Survey of Student Engagement, an Honors Program Student Survey to determine satisfaction and quality of our Honors Program, and an evaluation survey of our Governing Board (Council of Trustees) related to their roles and responsibilities, productivity, academic oversite, and personal assessment of the board.
We also completed the initial cycle of the revised annual institution assessment process with a 52% compliance rate for our 71 administrative support units and 63% compliance rate for our 250 academic programs. Our 2018-19 institutional effectiveness compliance goals were 85% to 95% compliance rates in both administrative and academic program areas for final “Results” report submissions. We realize this is a revised process and believe a number of factors may have suppressed our performance this past year. Annual assessment is now a two-step process involving “plan report” and “results report” submissions with separate performance monitoring tools for each step.
It is possible that green (compliance) performance indicators for fall semester “plan reports” were interpreted as successful completions of the entire annual assessment process; resulting in lower submissions of spring semester “results reports.” It is also probable that some results reports were not submitted for many of our 58 accredited academic programs during the spring semester due to variances in the completion of their annual assessment cycles (closing their assessment loops during fall term advisory board meetings). Also, as a revised process, better communication from our institutional effectiveness unit and additional accountability measures at the University level will also be needed.
We will soon be convening our University Strategic Assessment Committee (USAC) to develop an initial ranking of results report “action plans” requesting institutional funding to improve academic program and administrative service outcomes. The highest ranked requests will forwarded to our governance-related Budget & Planning Committee for funding considerations.
Our spring 2019 purchase requisition for membership in the PASSHE shared license for the NuventiveTM digital assessment platform was approved. One key characteristic of the purchase requisition included a Nuventive data-upload option, which provides assistance from the Nuventive team for an upload of all 2018-19 annual assessment templates, assessment coordinator information, program and service area outcomes, and assessment data from submitted assessment “Plan” and “Results” reports. During the early part of the Fall 2019 semester, the Nuventive team will also be working with our Faculty Professional Development and Teaching and Learning centers to design and deliver University-wide professional development workshops for academic and administrative assessment coordinators for operating the Nuventive system, initially for inputting and submitting 2019-20 annual assessment “Plan” reports.
Finally, this summer, the Institutional Effectiveness area welcomed the services of a dedicated full-time Management Technician to improve sustainability of our University-wide assessment process. This technician will focus on data analysis, survey support services, and operations (e.g., report generation) related to the Nuventive assessment system.
Fall Semester Activities: A Review
February 11, 2019
The Cal U accreditation webpages have been re-designed and updated as the “go-to” location of information related to Middle States regional and program-related accreditations. Resources at this site provide access to:
- The Middle States Revised Standards of Accreditation.
- Cal U’s 2015-2020 Strategic Plan: Charting our Path.
- A chronological listing of 10 Cal U Middle States reports and responses, including the Cal U 2010 Self-Study.
- Our 2018 Self-Study Design document.
- These periodic updates about the Cal U Self-Study process.
- A detailed listing of Cal U academic program recognitions, certifications and accreditations.
A productive fall 2018 semester occurred with various self-study organization meetings including the Steering Committee, seven Self-Study Working Groups, Compliance Committee, and Evidence Inventory Committee. View the Self-Study Organizational Structure.
Work progressed toward a February 2019 deadline for the completion of the first draft of the seven Self-Study Work Group chapters, and progress also occurred with the Compliance Report and digital Evidence Inventory.
The Steering Committee met four times, about every three weeks, to review progress for each self-study chapter. Work products of the fall semester Steering Committee meetings included a Middle States Self-Study Writing Team Template, a Middle States Self-Study Resources SharePoint group, an Evidence Inventory SharePoint group and a common message for the campus community for the primary purpose the self-study process. Business-style cards have been printed as an initial means of communicating the common message (front and back) to the greater university community.
Significant progress also occurred with the implementation of our revised University-wide institutional effectiveness (assessment) process during the fall 2018 semester. All academic programs and administrative programs/services in support of the student experience were verified from the University organization chart, along with each program coordinator and administrator. These leaders were asked to submit at least two program outcomes and methods of measuring each outcome by the middle of October to begin the first annual assessment cycle for compliance with the Middle States expectation of a University-wide “culture of assessment” at Cal U.
The Office of Institutional Effectiveness also developed two Assessment Monitoring Tools (AMTs), one for academic programs and another for administrative programs and services. The ATMs provide progress snapshots for assessment assignments with green (completed), yellow (partially completed) and red (not submitted) progress ratings for each program and service in support of the student experience.
The overall goal prior to the Middle States peer review team arrival on campus in spring 2020 is green-status AMT ratings for the assessment of all programs and services throughout the University. View an executive summary of academic programs and administrative support areas as of February 18, 2019.
Performance data for all submitted outcomes were collected from October to the end of the fall semester and will continue to be collected during the Spring 2019 semester. Near the end of the spring semester, each program/service area will meet to close the assessment loop (e.g., to measure, evaluate and discuss the performance for each outcome) and provide a final report outlining changes that may be implemented to improve performance during the 2019-2020 academic year.
In February 2019, we began to prepare a Cal U Institutional Assessment website to house the tools and resources needed for success in creating our campus “culture of assessment.” The link to this website will be provided during the next Campus Update.
We also organized and delivered a “Best Practices for Standard V Assessment” workshop at the Convocation Center for more than 20 self-study faculty, staff, administrator and student team members, facilitated by Lindsey Graham Guinn, a seasoned Director of Assessment and Middle States Liaison Officer at Washington & Jefferson University. Topics covered in this workshop included:
- Overview of the MSCHE Process.
- Systematic, Meaningful, and Useful Evidence of Assessment.
- Measures – Direct and Indirect.
- Clearly Stated Educational Goals.
- Organized and Systematic Assessments – General Education Assessment to Course Evaluations to Department and Program Assessment.
- Student Confidentiality and Other Assessment Policies.
- Non-Curricular Assessment of Students through Surveys.
This workshop was considered a great success, with praise from the participants and many requests for continuing our relationship as a consultant to provide additional professional development opportunities and assistance with our ongoing effort to develop a culture of assessment at Cal U.
Minimalist Approach for All Departments and Programs
Sept. 18, 2018
- All programs devlop SLOs (Student Learning Outcomes).
- Focus on 1-2 outcomes per year.
- At least 1 direct and 1 indirect measure.
- End-of-year forums to address student performance on selected outcomes.
- Identify strengths and weaknesses.
- Plan for addressing weakness.
- Document work.
Assessment Cycles, Timeline and Deliverables
Sept. 18, 2018
2018-2019 Culture of Assessment Timeline
Sept. 18, 2018
President’s State of the University Address
Sept. 13, 2018
[The following is an excerpt from the State of the University address delivered by University President Geraldine M. Jones at the Fall 2018 Faculty-Staff Convocation held Sept. 13, 2018, in the Natali Student Center.]
“Another highly collaborative process prepares us for Middle States re-accreditation and the campus wide peer evaluation visit scheduled for spring 2020.
“This fall our seven writing teams will be working on their initial self-study drafts. Their primary focus is to describe how academic and support areas across the University promote and support student success – defined by Middle States as student retention, completion and success after graduation.
“In order to achieve re-accreditation, Middle States requires all areas of the University to operate within a culture of assessment and improvement to promote student success. To meet this challenge, the assessment leadership team of Len Colelli, Steve Atkins, Holiday Adair and Justin Hackett worked all summer to develop a comprehensive assessment plan for the University.
“The new structure is designed to be systematic, useful and time-efficient for all involved – and the team is available to provide whatever assistance is needed to establish a culture of assessment across all program and service areas. The handout you received today includes a timeline and more information.
“Middle States accreditation is important to our standing in the higher education community, and I count on all of you to support the process with your best efforts and energy.”
Director of Institutional Effectiveness
June 5, 2018
Since late April, Cal U’s self-study team has included Dr. Steve Atkins, the University’s first director of institutional effectiveness.
He will focus on program assessment, which is critical to the accreditation process: Each of the seven Middle States Standards of Accreditation requires the Self-Study Report Working Groups to address an assessment criterion, and Standard V focuses on how the University assesses its institution-wide assessment processes.
Atkins says his goal at Cal U is make assessment “an understandable, consistent and sustainable process that is useful to faculty and staff. I also plan to facilitate a shift from accountability‐based assessment to a much more internally useful improvement‐based assessment program.”
Atkins comes to California from Punta Gorda, Fla., where he organized and managed a private higher education consulting company specializing in assessment, planning, institutional effectiveness, and accreditation.
He has more than 27 years of experience in four community and baccalaureate colleges, where he has been an adjunct professor of statistics, mathematics education, critical thinking, adult learning, research methodology and educational psychology; a tenure-track and tenured professor of mathematics; dean; and vice president for academic and student affairs.
Atkins earned his Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction at the University of North Carolina
Greensboro. He holds a master’s degree in mathematics from the University of North
Carolina Charlotte, and a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from Elon University, also
in North Carolina.
May 31, 2018
The University is preparing to develop a Self-Study Report for submission to a Peer Evaluation Team from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education; the team is expected to visit our campus during the Spring 2020 semester. The Self-Study Report is a major component of an eight-year institutional accreditation cycle designed to demonstrate our University’s commitment to continuous self-assessment.
The Self-Study Report is an inward-focused self-appraisal and institutional review by peers and colleagues assigned by the Middle States Commission to determine if our University:
- Has a mission appropriate for higher education.
- Is guided by well-defined and appropriate mission-related goals, including goals for student learning and success.
- Has established processes, programs and procedures (aligned with mission and goals) that can be realized.
- Is accomplishing its mission and goals in substantial measure.
- Is organized, staffed and supported so that it can be expected to continue to accomplish its mission and goals.
- Meets the seven Standards for Accreditation and 15 Requirements of Affiliation of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, along with relevant federal regulations.
- Assesses both institutional effectiveness and student learning outcomes and uses assessment results for improvement.
The Self-Study Report includes an executive summary, introduction, seven chapters (one for each Standard of Accreditation) and a conclusion; it is limited to 100 single-spaced pages. Seven Working Groups were organized to develop the seven chapters of the report, addressing appropriate criteria, requirements of affiliation, and institutional priorities associated with each Standard of Accreditation. Each of the Working Groups (see the Self-Study Design document, page 8) consists of:
- A faculty or staff co-chair.
- An administrator co-chair.
- Faculty representatives from each of the three undergraduate colleges (Education and Human Services, Liberal Arts, and Science and Technology.
- A Student Affairs representative.
- A SCUPA representative.
- Student representatives from the Commuter Council, Black Student Union, Rainbow Alliance, Student Athletic Council, Student Activities Board, Graduate Office, Inter-Residence Hall Council, and Student Government Association.
The fourteen Working Group co-chairs also serve on the Self-Study Steering Committee with the director of institutional effectiveness, the four-member Oversight Team, a co-chair of the Compliance Committee and a member of the Council of Trustees.
Working Group Kick-Off Meetings
May 14, 2018
Seven self-study working group kick-off meetings occurred on campus during the last five weeks of the spring semester. Their purpose was to acquaint members within each group; discuss the purpose of the Self-Study Design document and its location on the accreditation webpage; review the organizational structural, timeline of critical activities, and charge of each group within the design document; and view an introductory educational video about the accreditation process prepared by the Middle States Commission.
Discussion also occurred about plans to best communicate with working group members; achieve the charge of each group; and make summer assignments to prepare for developing the initial draft of each Working Group’s chapter during the fall 2018 semester.
Overall, the kick-off meetings seemed to go well. They generated lots of discussion and enthusiasm for the anticipated work of the seven Working Groups.
Final Self-Study Design Submission
May 1, 2018
Cal U’s Self-Study Design document is a plan for guiding the Middle States Commission on Higher Education self-study process. It enables the Steering Committee and its Working Groups to conceptualize and organize relevant tasks for the development of the Self-Study Report.
Members of the Steering Committee and Working Groups continuously refer to the Self-Study Design document to gauge progress and ensure that the objectives contained in the design are being met in a timely manner. The design also serves as a reminder of what tasks must be accomplished, how and when updates should be communicated, and how the Self-Study Report should be organized.
Feedback from Middle States liaison Dr. Ellie Fogarty, the Steering Committee, Council of Trustees and the campus community during the March 7 self-study preparation visit contributed to the final revision of the Self-Study Design. The document was formally submitted to Fogarty on May 1, 2018. The document can be viewed at the accreditation website.
Self-Study Preparation Visit
March 7, 2018
A Self-Study Preparation Visit by Middle States Commission institutional liaison Dr. Ellie Fogarty occurred on March 7, 2018. Fogarty’s purpose was to meet with various institutional stakeholders to discuss the accreditation process and our 2018 draft Self-Study Design document and to gather information about California University. The Self-Study Design is the University’s plan for developing the Self-Study Report, which will address the seven Commission Standards of Accreditation, 15 Requirements of Affiliation, and our four Institutional Priorities to be addressed in the Self-Study.
Fogarty met with:
- University President Geraldine Jones and her Cabinet.
- The Middle States Self-Study Steering Committee, which consists of co-chairs (faculty and staff) for the seven Self-Study Working Groups (writing teams), and a four-member Oversight Team (Len Colelli, Dan Engstrom, James Pflugh and Justin Hackett) who participated in the November 2017 Middle States Self-Study Design Institute in Philadelphia.
- Steve Atkins, director of institutional effectiveness.
- Ayanna Lyles, faculty co-chair of the Compliance Committee.
- James Davis, a member of the Council of Trustees.
After a working lunch with the Oversight Team, Fogarty hosted an open session with over 60 faculty, staff and students to explain the accreditation process; discuss the role of faculty, staff and students in the accreditation process; and answer questions. She then conducted an exit briefing with the Oversight Team, providing an analysis and review of the draft Self-Study Design Document.
Finally, a discussion was held with the Council of Trustees on its role in the accreditation process.
Feedback for the visit from our Middle States Commission liaison was positive.