Notes on
Accreditation Steering Committee Meeting
February 18, 1998
Members Present: Depauw, Jamison, Cochran, Zuiches, Sherman, Wack, Nakata, Vibber
Members Absent: McLeod, Altenkirch, Rimpau, Stock (excused), Doyle, Oaks
Materials Distributed: G.R. Bushe, Advances in Appreciative Inquiry as an Organization Development Intervention; W. Berquist, Institutional Self-Study and Accreditation: An Appreciative Perspective; and material on the self-study process from accreditation workshop were distributed and will be sent to absent members.
Committee Reports: Committee chairs all reported virtually complete data gathering. In other communication, McLeod and Oaks note that they are in the midst of the writing process.
Accreditation Workshop: Sherman reported attending a workshop put on by the NASC Commission on Colleges, Feb. 3-5. The recurring themes of the workshop were
Mission, Goals, Strategic Plan, and 2) Assessment that leads to change and new planning. Everything the institution does should clearly flow from the mission/plan, and assessment should feed into ongoing decisions and each new iteration of planning. Assessment covers all areas of the institution – not just academic programs.
The report needs to, in some way, address eligibility requirements, policy statements, and standards – not just the latter. If any of them conflict, the standards take precedence.
Campus-wide awareness was emphasized again.
We should always be thinking in terms of connections:
Mission/goals - goal attainment
Teaching - learning
Advising - student satisfaction
Assessment - planning
A good study:
Appreciative Inquiry: Sherman provided a quick overview of an approach to self-study that has been presented at two recent workshops she has attended, including one presentation by the executive director of the NASC Commission on Colleges. The concept and implications seemed to resonate with the committee members, who wanted to read the handout articles and discuss further at the next meeting.
The basic premise of appreciative inquiry – for our purposes – seems to be that studying what is working well, figuring out what makes it work that way, and trying to create similar conditions for other aspects of the institution, provides a lot of energy, optimism, and willingness to change – an obvious contrast to the usual approach of identifying problems and trying to "fix" them.
Awareness and Input: The group discussed the importance of 1) expanding awareness of accreditation across campus, 2) getting wider input into the identification of "opportunities for improvement," and 3) identifying ahead of time -- and addressing --what disaffected people might say to the evaluators.
Members agreed that J. Sherman would 1) place additional articles and publicity in the campus papers, 2) schedule community-wide forums for both general and specific issues, and 3) publicize the opportunity to respond to drafts and issues posted on the web.
Next Meeting: S. McLeod has noted that she teaches until 2:00 on Wed., so would be quite late. The next meeting is also scheduled during Spring Break. After polling the membership, it was determined that most people could meet on March 25th from 2:00-3:30 in Lighty 401.
Subsequent meetings for the semester will be:
April 15th from 2:00-3:30 in Lighty 401
May 20th from 2:00-3:30 in Lighty 401
June 17th from 2:00-3:30 in Lighty 401
Notes on
Accreditation Steering Committee Meeting
October 8, 1997
Members Present: McLeod; Altenkirch; Rimpau; Jamison; Stock; Cochran; Oaks; Vibber; Sherman; Wack; and Pete Jacoby for Zuiches.
Members Absent: Gamble; DePauw; Doyle; Nakata
Materials: Copies of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges document on assessment were distributed, and will be sent to absent members.
Committee reports: Most committees have met and have made information-gathering assignments among their members. Committees IA and V are scheduled to meet next week for that purpose. Committee chairs want to spend the next two months gathering and organizing information before the steering committee has any lengthy discussions about the conceptual directions of the self-study report.
Diversity: Chairs felt that a number of their committees would be addressing diversity issues, and that we should wait to evaluate how well that topic is integrated throughout until we begin to organize information together.
Coordinating Assessment: Wack reported that her committee had assigned members to act as liaisons with Committees IA (General and Undergraduate Education), IB (Graduate Issues), and ID (Distance Learning) in order to ensure that assessment is integrated throughout, but that effort is not duplicated.
Data Requests and Liaisons: Most – but not all – committees need information from units other than those represented by their members. Some need information from nearly every unit on and off campus. Altenkirch suggested developing an information matrix that would identify the information needed and from whom. Chairs agreed that they would forward to Sherman their information needs that would have to be requested from outside the committee. She will develop the matrix.
In addition, the provost will be asked to request that each dean, or non-academic unit head, appoint an accreditation liaison to whom ongoing information requests can be made.
Vibber reminded the group that, in order to ensure currency, materials should be obtained from their "official" sources, rather than from one’s own files.
Wack explained that her members believe they have not only an information-gathering chore, but a major hole to fill – i.e., end of program assessment – and that they need to get the word out right away to give departments and programs time to deal with this gap. The committee agreed that the Assessment Committee should go ahead with an information request/educational communication. Wack and Sherman will determine to and from whom it will occur.
Other chairs agreed to review their standards to ensure that there are no other similarly large holes to be addressed.
Next Meeting: The next meeting will be on Wednesday, November 12, 2:30-3:30, in Lighty 405.
Accreditation Steering Committee
Meeting Summary
August 18, 1997
Members Present: J. Sherman, K. DePauw, J. Rimpau, D. Pond-Smith (for Jim Zuiches), B. Pate, A. Jamison, S. McLeod, J, Cochran
Members Absent: G. Gamble, D. Stock, M. K. Oaks, S. Nakata, S. Vibber
A. Review -- The Accreditation Steering Committee (ACS) reviewed the summary of the last meeting and the tasks and timelines agreed to at that time. Karen DePauw emphasized the following points:
1. Assessment is key.
2. Everyone (faculty, staff, students) needs to know about WSU accreditation by the time of the April 1999 visit.
3. Our multi-located university does not fit easily into the standards. NASC has OK’d our designing the self-study to best represent WSU.
4. We will approach accreditation as an opportunity that WSU can use for self-reflection and improvement.
Brad Pate suggested that since WSU’s branch campus model is similar to Penn State’s, we might get some insight into dealing with accrediting agencies about that issue by reviewing their latest report and the standards they meet. Jane will locate those documents.
B. ASC Meetings --The regular meeting time needs to be changed to allow Geoff Gamble to participate. The groups settled on 1:30 Wed. as the next preferable time. [New: Geoff can’t meet until 2:30 on Wednesdays. We’ll try second Wednesdays, 2:30-3:30 for a couple of months and see if Brad and Sue can still meet their 4:00 classes on time.]
The second Wednesday of the month was selected as the regular meeting of the steering committee, beginning Oct. 8. As much as possible, meetings will continue to be held in Lighty 403.
D. Membership -- If the appropriate reviews of subcommittee membership are completed, and potential chairs contacted, the lists of subcommittees will be finalized early this week and sent out to ASC members right away.
E. Large Group Meeting -- Members agreed that an initial orientation of all committee and subcommittee members would be helpful and efficient. Jane and Karen will find a date in early Sept., probably the 10th, which had been scheduled for the cancelled Leadership Conference. Pres. Smith and/or Provost Bataille will present the charge, Karen will do the presentation she did for the Regents, Jane will talk briefly about the current process, and Geoff, Karen, and Jane will answer questions. Refreshments will be served. WHETS will link all sites. [New: Wednesday, September 10, from 1:00 – 2:30 is available for the large group meeting.]
F. Materials -- Members agreed that the following material would be helpful. Jane will ensure that they receive the copies they need:
1. For themselves:
The 1990 Washington State University Self-Study Report and NASC’s 1990 Evaluation Committee Report
The Kellogg Commission Report, Returning to Our Roots—The Student Experience
2. For Committee and Subcommittee Members:
The Accreditation Handbook (1996)
Karen’s handout from the report to the Regents
The Fifth Year Interim Evaluation Report for the Commission on Colleges
G. Meeting Schedules --ASC members will set up meeting schedules for their committees. Meeting information should be provided to WSU Week by Monday noon for publication on Friday. Jane requested that she be notified early about meeting schedules so that she can attend whenever possible
G. Meeting Locations – Subcommittees can meet at any convenient location, but arrangements need to be made for telephone hook-up for distant members. To schedule Lighty 403, call Donna Jean Cofield at 5-5581. Jane will see if the smaller room in the back of the French 436 area is readily available. Small conference rooms in the CUB are no-charge at lunch time and can be scheduled with Donna Robinson (5-3570).
H. Information Dissemination -- Jane will try to get Accreditation put on the August 22 Leadership Council agenda, and will subsequently visit deans’ administrative meetings and other unit meetings to make brief presentations. She will be available to other groups, as well.
Jane and Karen will talk with Barb Petura and Sue Hinz on 8/19 about finalizing initial publicity plans.
Brad Pate noted that Montana has put the standards on the web. Jane and Karen will talk with Barb Petura about our picking it up from them.