|
Higher Learning Commission President Dr. Sylvia Manning unveiled a
proposal at the commission's April 2009 annual meeting to de-couple the
compliance (assurance process) and self-improvement (improvement
process) goals of accreditation. Now called the open pathway, the model
establishes a ten-year cycle of accreditation in which a full review of
institutional compliance with commission criteria and federal
requirements will occur twice. The improvement process will thus be free
to focus genuinely on institutional improvement.
Under the assurance process, colleges will build an evidence file of
data and materials. These materials will be transmitted and stored
electronically. With the exception of the annual data update, which
institutions currently must complete, and an assurance argument in years
four and ten that presents the institution's case that it fulfills the
commission's criteria for accreditation and complies with all federal
requirements, all other materials in the evidence file already will have
been prepared for other institutional purposes. The commission will
conduct assurance reviews in year four (no visit) and year ten (with
visit).
The improvement process will consist of a major quality initiative
that the institution undertakes for substantial institutional
improvement. The institution may propose its own projects or themes as
the focus of its quality initiative or it may choose from a menu of
options provided by the commission. The following are examples of the
kinds of projects the commission might expect to see: an institution
undertakes a broad based self-evaluation and reflection leading to
revision or restatement of its mission, vision, and goals; an
institution joins with a group of peer institutions, which it
identifies, to develop a benchmarking process for broad institutional
self-assessment; an institution undertakes a multi-year process to
create systemic, comprehensive assessment of student learning; a
four-year institution joins with major feeder community colleges to
create a growth program based on dual admission, joint recruitment and
coordinated curriculum and student support. A peer review team will
approve the plan at the beginning and will evaluate the institution's
results report at the conclusion of the initiative. To encourage
ambition and risk-taking, the improvement process will not result in
sanction.
Reaccredidation will be granted based on the results of both the
assurance and improvement processes. The commission will disclose, in
abbreviated form, the results of assurance reviews. The format will be
standard. The commission anticipates no public disclosure of the results
visit or any aspect of the improvement process.
Some institutions will be required to follow a foundational pathway
that provides more intense monitoring on a five year cycle. This
determination is based on factors from the institution's past
relationship with the commission. All institutions seeking initial
accreditation status must follow the commission-mandated pathway. The
Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) will remain unchanged for
the foreseeable future.
|
