Transcript Document
Higher Learning Commission (North Central Association) Comparison/Evaluation of AQIP and PEAQ Michelle Johnston Accreditation • Higher Learning Commission (North Central Association)— one of six regional associations Two Types • Program to Evaluate and Advance Quality (PEAQ) • Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) Characteristics • Voluntary • Self-evaluation (Self-study) • Peer review (eligible and trained peer reviewer, consultant-evaluators) in the specific processes—AQIP and PEAQ • Quality Assurance Accreditation Types • Institutionalized (HLC) - has as guiding principles promotes: – Integrity, – Flexibility, – Openness, and – Excellence. • Specialized-programmatic (NCATE, TEAC, NRPA) Accreditation as a Learning Experience • Learning experience for all; • All university participants learn; and • Consultant-evaluators learn. PEAQ Criteria 1. Mission and integrity 2. Preparing for the future 3. Student learning and effective teaching 4. Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of knowledge 5. Engagement and Service PEAQ • Succinctly, the mission is the key element in this form of accreditation. The question needs to be asked: Is there evidence that all components of the institution support the mission? Ferris’ Mission Statement • Ferris State University will be a national leader in providing opportunities for innovative teaching and learning in careeroriented, technological and professional education. AQIP Criteria 1. Helping students learn 2. Accomplishing distinctive objectives 3. Understanding student and stakeholder needs 4. Valuing People 5. Leading and communicating 6. Supporting institutional operations—providing an environment in which learning can thrive AQIP Criteria cont. 7. Measuring effectiveness 8. Planning for continuous improvement—vision, planning, strategies, action plans, coordination, alignment of strategies and action plans 9. Building collaborative relationships to determine how they contribute to accomplishing the mission PEAQ AQIP (launched 1999) Fits the distinctive nature of the institution—based on mission Defining quality as meeting stakeholders expectations Self-study process helps institution maintain focus Focus on stakeholder expectations-learning outcomes Effective evaluation of the whole organization Institutional self-assessment from a quality perspective Connects with ongoing vision of the organization Broad-based involvement Engages the multiple constituencies of the organization Leadership supports a qualitydriving culture Builds on existing practices Institution centers on learning PEAQ AQIP (launched 1999) Has strong President and Board support Systematic development of faculty, staff, administrators, etc. Draws on recognized leaders throughout the organization Internal and external collaboration Produces evidence that accreditation criteria are met Quality-driven institutions promote flexibility and agility Commitment to peer review Foresight—future oriented Cyclical Information—use data Integrity—institution fulfills its public responsibility toward citizens PEAQ AQIP (launched 1999) Cyclical continuous improvement Three cycles—Action (one-year); Strategy (four-year); Accreditation (seven-year) Action project committed to three or four action projects to complete in months or years with Action Project updates—improvements in Systems Portfolio Strategy in which institutions maintain systems portfolio describes systems and processes used to achieve goals; participation in strategy forum drives organizations Accreditation—reviews evidence of action cycles and strategy cycles—check-up visits before reaffirmation of accreditation Flexibility • AQIP has the action and strategy cycles • PEAQ is flexible according to the institutional mission Autonomy • PEAQ is mission-driven while AQIP asks about our stakeholders. Therefore, I think both can allow Ferris State University to be autonomous in its decision making. • AQIP – institution decides on actions and strategy sessions. Sustained Work • AQIP because it is continuous. There are always action cycles and/or strategy cycles in which the institution should be engaged, rather than PEAQ in which there is a 10-year cycle. In some institutions, there are stops and gaps between cycles. Greater Continuity of Effort • Perhaps AQIP because it looks at the stakeholders and the objectives that support the learning of our primary stakeholders (students). Institutional Culture • Ferris State University is familiar with the PEAQ process. It would take professional development to for all (faculty, staff, administrators, etc.) to make the change. However, Ferris State University does support professional learning which is AQIP. Goal Setting and Planning • Procedures; Both Convenience • Probably PEAQ, but AQIP would engage more people and sustain the improvement. Gain More Knowledge • AQIP because there is continuous work and data analysis. Positive Improvement • AQIP because of the action and strategy cycles • AQIP really needs someone to oversee all of the cycles Summary – Closing Thoughts • What do you think?