Transcript NCA Accreditation Leadership Team

NCA Accreditation
Leadership Team
Fall 2008 Meeting
September 26, 2008
The NCA Team





Co-Chairs: Dr. Jack Maynard and Dr.Virgil Sheets
NCA Liaison: Dr. Ed Kinley
NCA Co-Coordinators: Dr. Susan Powers & Dr. Nancy
Rogers
NCA Administrative Fellow: Dr. Robert Guell
NCA Administrative Assistant: Ms. Rebecca Stinnett
Status of 2010 Visit
NCA Survey

Faculty/Staff/EAP survey



Goes through middle of October
Completed to date: 103 Faculty, 180 Staff
Student Survey


Goes through end of October
Completed to date: 141 students
Progress on Self-Study

Data Packs on NCA site



Information collected by Criterion Committees
Requests reviewed by Data Committee
Documents found, scanned, and linked
http://irt2.indstate.edu/nca2010/index.cfm?fuseaction=data.dataMain
Criterion Committees
Criterion 1
Mission & Integrity
Criterion 1





1a - The organization's mission documents are clear and
articulate publicly the organization's commitments
1b - In its mission documents, the organization recognizes the
diversity of its learners, other constituencies, and the greater
society it serves.
1c - Understanding of and support for the mission pervade the
organization.
1d - The organization's governance and administrative
structure promote effective leadership and support
collaborative processes that enable the organization to fulfill
its mission.
1e - The organization upholds and protects its integrity.
Strengths




Recently revised mission and values statements were
developed through an open process that incorporated input
from all University stakeholders and the Board of Trustees.
Increase in percentages of students and faculty who identify
themselves as ethnic minority.
The fraction of ISU students from underrepresented groups
exceeds those at all other public, four-year degree-granting
institutions in the State.
The University’s 2004 strategic plan articulates three initiatives
(experiential learning, community engagement, and distinctive
programs) that have since been implemented and have broad
support.
Weakness



University does not have a comprehensive policy to deal
with student problems and complaints.
University needs to substantiate its claims (e.g., how do
we know that goals of campus constituencies are aligned
with the mission statement?).
The challenge is to not simply present data, but to analyze
the related situation and conditions and determine if the
data is telling the real story, e.g., diversity where we feel
the data does not tell the entire story.
Linkage to Special Emphasis





Faculty involvement in Community Engagement and
Experiential Learning
Faculty awards and recognition in Community
Engagement
Departmental and College Mission Statements
Promising Scholars program
Distinctive Programs
Criterion 2
Preparing for the Future
Criterion 2




2a: The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped
by multiple societal and economic trends.
2b: The organization’s resource base supports its educational
programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their
quality in the future.
2c: The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment
processes provide reliable evidence of institutional
effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous
improvement.
2d: All levels of planning align with the organization’s mission,
thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.
Our Strengths





Review of academic programs
Investment in technology to enhance learning
Emphasis on international programs
Investment in Programs of Promise
Support for Community Engagement
Weakness




Lack of ethnic diversity in faculty
Additional strategic planning is needed for academic
programs and enrollment
Divisions and departments need to develop strategic
plans with goals and timelines for achieving goals that
align with overall University strategic planning efforts.
Training opportunities for staff
Linkage to Special Emphasis

Resources for Community Engagement


Identification from academic and administrative units regarding
the amount of departmental resources devoted to Community
Engagement efforts.
Student Involvement in Community Engagement

What incentives might be needed to encourage participation
by students
Criterion 3
Student Learning and Effective Teaching
Criterion 3
•
•
•
•
3a: The organization’s goals for student learning outcomes
are clearly stated for each educational program and make
effective assessment possible.
3b: The organization values and supports effective
teaching.
3c: The organization creates effective learning
environments.
3d: The organization’s learning resources support student
learning and effective teaching.
Our Strengths
•
•
A number of processes have been in place over the years
to implementation. We have a number of programs that
have done outstanding work with SOA. Examples include:
Nursing, Education, Athletic Training, Social Work (all
accredited); Criminology, Economics, History, Math,
Philosophy (non-accredited).
Strong support for creating effective learning
environments (evidence of technology classrooms, laptop
initiative, CIRT, supports and rewards for teaching, student
support resources, faculty professional development)
Weaknesses

We still have programs with no/limited SOA







64% have presented plans
47% have provided summaries
Large gaps in Arts & Sciences and Technology
Isolated gaps in Business
A few gaps in NHHS, Education
We know more about “plans” and less about actual data
Organization’s approach to aspects of Criterion 3 are
disjointed and not holistic


Multiple approaches to plans and reporting
No over-arching examination
Linkage to Special Emphasis

Student involvement & curriculum


Data: SOA plan analysis (academic and student affairs)
Faculty Involvement

Data: Professional Development data, faculty vita/Digital
Measures
Criterion 4
Acquisition, Discovery, & the Application of Knowledge
Criterion 4
4a: The organization demonstrates, through the actions of its
board, administrators, students, faculty, and staff, that it values a
life of learning.
4b: The organization demonstrates that acquisition of a breadth
of knowledge and skills and the exercise of intellectual inquiry
are integral to its educational programs.
4c: The organization assesses the usefulness of its curricula to
students who will live and work in a global, diverse, and
technological society.
4d: The organization provides support to ensure that faculty,
students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge
responsibly.
Our Strengths

Numerous programs in place and processes to capture much
of the information needed for Criterion 4.



Actions: Awards, Programs of Distinction, Promising Scholars, Support
for Professional Development, UG/Grad Research Support, and
Conferences and Events
Integration into Educational Programs: UG/Grad Research Showcase,
Apprentice Programs, and Internships
Support for Responsible Use of Knowledge: Internal Compliance
Committees and Review, New Faculty Orientation, On-Line and Face-toFace Training, Mentoring Through Faculty/Student Research, Technology
Guide, Service and Engagement Activities (Alternative Spring Break,
Habitat for Humanity, American Democracy Project), Code of Student
Conduct, New Academic Integrity Policy
Weaknesses

Assessment of the Usefulness of Its Curricula


We do have some tools that we use effectively to assess
outcomes (e.g., NSSE and General Ed Competencies)
We probably have other tools that are gathering this
information, but the information isn’t being collected or
reported in a systematic way.
Linkage to Special Emphasis

Much of what we do to support the Acquisition,
Discovery, and the Application of Knowledge happens in
the context of Community Engagement and Experiential
Learning (e.g., UG/Grad Research, Conferences and
Events, Apprentice Programs and Internships, Service and
Engagement Activities).
Criterion 5
Engagement and Service
Criterion 5

5a: The organization learns from its constituencies and serves
and analyzes its capacity to serve their needs and
expectations.

5b: The organization has the capacity and the commitment to
engage with its identified constituencies and communities.

5c:The organization demonstrates its responsiveness to those
constituencies that depend on it for service.

5d: Internal and external constituencies value the services the
organization provides.
Our Strengths

ISU is a collaborative partner in a wide range of
community initiatives that address economic, human
services, education, environmental, health and other
needs locally and beyond.

ISU has several coordinating structures including
CPSCE, CBSEI and CE that are supported by the
University’s base budget and external grants and
contracts.
Our Weaknesses



No comprehensive evaluation of external constituencies
and their perceptions of the services we provide
Sustainability of community initiatives
Extent to which community engagement/service learning
is integrated across the curriculum
Linkage to Special Emphasis

Community Involvement


Data: Internal and external evaluations of CE/EL; 2006 Carnegie
Report
Faculty/Staff Involvement


Data: communication of CE/EL priorities to internal and
external audiences (i.e. ISU Markeing and Communication)
Infastructure to support CE/EL (CPSCE and coordinating
structures, ISU handbook and HR policies, budget analysis)
Questions and Answers
How the Leadership Team Can Help






NCA Survey
Faculty Vita
November Retreat
Special Emphasis
Fill in Missing Data
Other Ideas?
Open Discussion