Transcript 10 Trends Impacting Higher Education

Key Trends for Quality
Assurance in the United
States Today
Ralph A. Wolff
President and Executive Director
Senior College Commission
Western Assoc. of Schools and Colleges
Main Points



Accreditation was originally designed to serve
institutions to assure that they met the minimum
standards of the agency
Recently, major reforms were instituted to make
accreditation a key driver for internal quality
improvement
New challenges from the federal government
call for accreditation to adopt a new role – as an
agent for accountability to the public
R. Wolff June 2010
2
Overview





Background and overview of US accreditation
Current issues for quality assurance in US today
The changing roles accreditation performs and
their implications
Tensions that will need to be managed
Predicted new roles for accreditation
R. Wolff June 2010
3
History and Authority






Created by institutions over 100 years ago
Private and nongovernmental
System of self-regulation based on peer review
Mission-centered; individual institution based
Sets minimum standards and recommends
improvements
Linked to federal financial aid in 1952 through
“recognition” process
R. Wolff June 2010
4
Types of Accreditation


Institutional
-- Regional (6 regions; 7 commissions) (140 –
1080 institutions) (4314 institutions)
-- National (7 agencies) (3400 institutions)
-- Religious (4 agencies) (415 institutions)
Specialized/Professional
-- > 60 and growing (20,000 programs)
R. Wolff June 2010
5
Accreditation Regions
R. Wolff June 2010
6
Federal Review of Accrediting
Agencies




Extensive recognition review every 5 years
Required to have standards in 10 areas
First is “success with respect to student
achievement”
Increasing requirements to monitor institutional
growth and changes, distance education,
finances, etc.
R. Wolff June 2010
7
Current Issues Affecting Quality
Assurance






Reduction of financial support
Decline in global competitiveness
Concern about student achievement
Increasing scale of distance education
De-institutionalization of learning
Rise of for-profit and new institutions
R. Wolff June 2010
8
Reduction of Financial Support




Reduced state support leads to higher tuition at
public institutions
Private institutions experience tight credit, lower
endowment return, and decreased donations
$50B stimulus money for higher education is
one time; Federal financial aid increases do not
make up difference
Student debt load and work hours increasing
R. Wolff June 2010
9
Decline in Global Competitiveness





Drop in high school graduation rates (77.5%)
Dropped from 1st to 7th in college participation
rates of 18-24 year olds
2d for 35-64 yr. olds; 10th for 25-34
15th in completion rates
Lower than OECD average for science and
math literacy for 15 yr. olds (PISA scores)
R. Wolff June 2010
10
Concern About Student Achievement



Completion rates: 54% after 6 years
-- need for increased transfers from community
colleges
-- impact of increased work hours and debt load
Student learning results: NAAL, employer
surveys
Data from national surveys – NSSE, CIRP
R. Wolff June 2010
11
Increasing Scale of Distance Education





> 2 million students
Growing rapidly, increasing competition
Hybrid programs most effective
Can be centers of high profit
Continuing Congressional concerns over
assuring student identity and impact on quality
of rapid growth
R. Wolff June 2010
12
De-Institutionalization of Learning





>one-third of students attend more than one
institution
About 10% are simultaneously enrolled at more
than one institution
Recognition of prior learning
Availability of open source courses – MIT,
iTunesU, YouTubeU
DIY – do it yourself learning – eHow.com
R. Wolff June 2010
13
Rise of For-Profit and New Institutions





Fastest growing sector, 285% in 10 years
42% of online market
Growth, scalability and high profitability of
national systems
Increasing mergers, acquisitions, conversion of
nonprofit universities
Joint ventures with nonprofit institutions
R. Wolff June 2010
14
New Forms of Institutions





New, highly specialized institutions/programs
Consortial degree programs across institutions
The “partnering” university – joint and dual
degrees
Privatized public universities
Credit aggregators
R. Wolff June 2010
15
Accreditation Reforms 1998-2010

Changes in standards – shift from inputs to focus
on learning outcomes
-- required learning outcomes at institutional and
program levels; alignment of course outcomes
-- Assessment by multiple means including
review of student work
-- WASC – mandatory external program review
-- Use of assessment results for improvement
R. Wolff June 2010
16
Accreditation Reforms (2)

Changes to visit process – one visit cannot do it all
-- SACS Quality Enhancement Project
-- HLC Academic Quality Improvement
Program
-- WASC 3 stage process with a Capacity Review
and a separate Educational Effectiveness Review
R. Wolff June 2010
17
Impact of Reforms on Institutions




Focus on internal institutional improvement
Nearly all institutions are now identifying
learning outcomes
Program reviews have been significantly
improved, and now address achievement of
program learning outcomes
Institutions have significantly increased data
collection and analysis
R. Wolff June 2010
18
Impact of Reforms on Accreditation


Accreditation leading institutions into new areas
-- student and organizational learning
-- program review
Accrediting agencies becoming educational
enterprises
-- assessment and program review seminars
-- annual meetings
-- Assessment Leadership Academy
R. Wolff June 2010
19
The Challenge of Public Accountability



Retention and graduation rates: what number is
“good enough” for continued accreditation?
Student learning: how shall accrediting agencies
determine what types and levels of learning is
“good enough”?
Public reporting and transparency: what
information should be made public, and by
whom?
R. Wolff June 2010
20
Public Accountability – A New Role
Focus:
Compliance
Improvement
Stance
Compliance
Collaboration Externally
valid and
rigorous
Scope of
review
All standards Selected
topics or
themes
Specific
public policy
areas
identified
Standards
Prescriptive
Defined
levels of
performance
Adaptive
R. Wolff June 2010
Accountability
21
Focus:
Compliance
Improvement
Accountability
Level of
judgment
Meets
standards at
minimum
level
Institution
defines level
of
performance
Reviewed
against
external
comparative
indicators
Ownership
of process
Controlled by Mission
accrediting
centered;
agency
framed by
institutions
Emphasis on
public
interest/acco
untability
Reporting
Action
reported
Publicly
reported
Institution
releases
R. Wolff June 2010
22
President Obama’s Priorities






Highest proportion of college graduates in the
world by 2020 (40 % → 60%)
National high school exit standards
Linked to college readiness standards
$15 billion community college initiative
$50 million for free online courses
New regulations for institutions and accreditors
WFS 7-09
23
WASC Response




Inventory of Educational Effectiveness
Indicators
Rubrics for Outcomes, Capstone Courses,
Portfolios, Program Review and general
Education
Focus on retention/graduation in all visits
Increased transparency – retention/graduation
rates and learning results published by
institution
R. Wolff June 2010
24
Inventory of EE Indicators
Category
Have
formal
outcomes
been
developed
?
Where are
outcomes
published
?
Other
than
GPA,
what
evidence
is used?
Who
interprets
the
evidence?
Process
used?
How are
the
findings
used?
Date of
last
program
review?
At inst.
level
For
general
education
List each
degree
program
R. Wolff June 2010
25
Rubric for Capstone Courses
Criterion
Initial
Emerging
Developed
Highly
Developed
Relevant
outcomes
and evidence
identified
Valid results
Reliable
results
Results are
used
The student
experience
R. Wolff June 2010
26
Tensions to Be Managed





Rankings vs. focus on learning outcomes
Mission centered vs. comparative results
Peer review vs. external benchmarks
What can be measured (normed tests) vs. what
should be learned (soft skills)
Faculty support and rewards for scholarship vs.
improving learning
R. Wolff June 2010
27
Predictions for the Future




Calls for accountability and public reporting will
increase
The Department of Education will require
clearer and more explicit standards
Accreditation will need to incorporate key policy
issues within its mission-centered framework
Accrediting agencies will embrace this new role
in different ways, developing multiple models
R. Wolff June 2010
28
Summary



While accreditation is one q.a. system, there are
multiple agencies and approaches
The belief that anyone can learn and earn a
degree at any point in their life has created a
highly diverse system
There is room for tremendous growth in higher
education, which will lead to new institutional
forms
R. Wolff June 2010
29
Summary (2)



New policy issues will lead accreditation into
new areas of leadership
Accreditation has proven itself capable of
tremendous reform and adaptability and it will
do so in response to new accountability
demands
This will lead to greater emphasis on outcomes
and greater transparency
R. Wolff June 2010
30