Transcript Document

2012 Middle States Accreditation
Report Review
Chapter 2: Institutional Vitality
Standards 2 and 3
Chapter 3: Institutional Leadership and Governance
Standards 4 and 5
MSCHE
Accreditation
 Mission-based
 Decennial self-study
• Compliance and improvement
• 14 Standards
• Characteristics of Excellence
• Emphasis on results instead of processes
2011-2012 Timeline
 Fall 2011
• Campus comment on self-study draft
• Evaluation team Chair reviews draft
• Dr. Javier Cevallos
• President, Kutztown University of Pennsylvania
• November 2nd - 4th: Dr. Cevallos makes preliminary
campus visit
• Final self-study report prepared
• Preparation of electronic document repository
 Spring 2012
• Final report sent to team (6 wks. prior to visit)
• April 1st – 4th : Team visit and report
• Institution response
Organization of Self-Study
Comprehensive Model
 14 Standards grouped into 8 chapters
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chapter 1: Institutional Excellence
Chapter 2: Institutional Vitality
Chapter 3: Institutional Leadership and Governance
Chapter 4: A Learner-Centered Campus
Chapter 5: A Vibrant Faculty
Chapter 6: Intellectual Rigor
Chapter 7: An Education for the 21st Century
Chapter 8: A Culture of Continuous Improvement
Standard Description
Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and
Institutional Renewal
 Ongoing planning and resource allocation based on its
mission and goals, developing objectives to achieve them
 Use of the results of assessment activities for institutional
renewal
 Implementation and evaluation of the success of the
strategic plan
 Resource allocation supports improvements and
maintenance of institutional quality
Standard Description
Standard 3: Institutional Resources
 The resources necessary to achieve our mission are
available and accessible
 As part of ongoing outcomes assessment, analyze the
effectiveness and efficiency of resource use in the context
of the institution’s mission
Work Group Members
Joe Moreau (Chair)
Maria Nakamura
Lorrie Clemo
Casey Raymond
Mike Flaherty
Tom Simmonds
Dan Griffin
Mark Slayton
Jeff Grimshaw
Byron Smith
Bernie Henderson
Al Stamm
Linda Rae Markert
Steven DiMarzo
Input/Data Sources Reviewed
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Engaging Challenge: The Sesquicentennial Plan
Oswego: By the Numbers
The Power of SUNY
Academic Affairs Annual Report
Campus Concept Committee
SUNY Oswego Climate Action Plan
IPEDS data
Divisional budget data
Facilities master plan
Priorities and Planning Council meeting minutes
Division of Administration and Finance annual reports
Budget Advisory meeting minutes
Interviews with specific stakeholders
General Findings
 SUNY Oswego successfully utilizes mature and
evolving planning processes at all levels
 The college master plan and facilities capital plan
have provided a solid foundation for the ongoing
development of the campus
 Fiscal resources are managed prudently and
effectively to meet the current and future obligations
of the college
General Findings (cont.)
 Human resources are evaluated and allocated in a
manner consistent with the short- and long-term
goals of the college
 The college provides a robust and reliable set of
technology resources to support creativity,
innovation, and experimentation in learning,
teaching, and research
Recommendations
 Complete a technology plan in support of the
college's strategic plan
 Make strategic planning even more transparent and
vital
 Develop a virtual planning infrastructure and related
processes to support broader participation
 Optimize alternative revenue streams and continue
to pursue new alternative revenue streams
 Pursue the development of public/private
partnerships to advance strategic initiatives and
diversify our revenue streams
Questions or Comments?
Standard Description
Standard 4
 A system of governance that defines the roles of
the institutional constituencies in and decisionmaking.
 A governance structure includes an active
governing body with sufficient autonomy.
Standard 5
 The institution’s governance structure and services
• facilitate learning and research/scholarship
• foster quality improvement
• support the institution’s organization and
governance.
Work Group Members
Robert Moore (Chair)
Susan Camp
Michael LeBlanc
Kristen Eichorn
Margaret Ryniker
David King
Chuck Spector
John LaLande
Casey Walpole
Input/Data Sources Reviewed
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Academic Affairs annual reports
Admissions Selectivity Matrix
Discussions with academic deans and governance leaders
Divisional Budget data
Faculty Assembly meeting minutes and handouts
Faculty Bylaws
IPEDS Data on instructional and administrative costs
Membership of the Faculty Assembly and its standing councils,
2010-2011
Membership and Minutes of the President's Council, Spring 2011
Organizational charts 2006-2010
Reports from the Retention Steering Committee
Support for Undergraduate Research (Provost's Office)
Table of Expenses and Deductions 2002-2010 (IR&A)
General Findings
 The challenges posed by fiscal constraints and
other changes met with vision and preparation
•
•
•
•
•
upgraded physical facilities
expanded academic programs
increased presence in Syracuse with the Metro Center
more international students to our campus
more of our students studying abroad
 Leadership at SUNY Oswego has engaged in
collaborative planning.
General Findings (cont.)
 The task force model has proven to be an effective
tool for shared governance.
• Policy recommendations with timeliness, inclusiveness,
transparency.
 Student perspectives in our decision-making
• Opportunities within the structure
• Lack of participation in practice
Recommendations
 Create structures to encourage more student
involvement.
 Identify and mentor potential candidates for leadership
roles, particularly among the more recently-hired
faculty.
 Develop more effective communications practices with
respect to administrative requests for information/data
and the rationale behind the resulting decisions.
Recommendations (cont.)
 Review official FA guidelines as well as culture in an
effort to ensure that body represents the will of faculty
and is viewed as a relevant, important organization by
newer faculty.
Questions or Comments?