Judy Beachler, Cosumnes River CollegeJulie Bruno, Sierra CollegeRichard Mahon, Riverside City College 

The Accreditation Team(s)

The Accreditation Team:

What is your college’s process for establishing your Accreditation team? What roles do existing college leaders play? Will you be ready when your visiting team arrives? How should you welcome your visiting team and what can you do to facilitate its ability to see your college as it really is in just two and half days?

The Accreditation Team

Panel’s experience with accreditation and team visits

Judy…

Julie…

Richard…

The Accreditation Team

What is your local process for building the self-evaluation/accreditation team?

What roles will existing college committees and their leaders and members play?

What does the self-evaluation committee structure look like?

Who appoints the members and how?

The Accreditation Timeline

What is your timeline for the self-evaluation process, including milestones along the way?

Who reviews drafts? Do they receive drafts as information or for approval?

How are standards judged unmet addressed?

How is the process managed so as to enhance local processes and improve the college?

The Accreditation Team

What is your process for local input, for writing, and for editing the self-study?

What tips do you have on disseminating it to the visiting team?

Is there such a thing as “too much” evidence? Is a 500-page self-evaluation document a good thing?

The Visiting Team’s Role

Team selection & training: Professional peers, volunteers, offer

independent insights, judgment and evaluation

Evaluates the institution using accreditation standards

Confirms and finds evidence for the assertions in the self study report against the standards

Calls attention to weaknesses unrecognized by the college itself

The Visiting Team…

Assures the Commission that the college has been responsive to recommendations of previous visiting teams

Assures the Commission that the college has developed sound evaluation and planning procedures to foster improvement of student learning outcomes

Encourages the college’s commitment to its continuing pursuit of excellence

Expectations of Team Members

Know ACCJC standards, eligibility requirements, and pertinent policies

Recognize the standards as the necessary minimum conditions for high quality education

Recognize the standards as statements of best practice in higher education

Understand that colleges are accredited using the ACCJC standards rather than the regulations or requirements of other groups

Expectations, continued

Appreciate that peer review lies at the heart of the accreditation process

Remember that team members represent the Commission

Maintain objectivity and flexibility

Rely on evidence in making judgments about the college

Maintain confidentiality

Before the Team Arrives on Campus

Develop a college culture around accreditation:

Kick off event to celebrate completion of self evaluation

Don’t wait for the visit to address deficiencies

Meet with campus groups to discuss possible meetings

Be prepared to showcase college achievements as well as challenges to highlight as appropriate

The Self Evaluation steering committee is usually the first to meet with the team, so be prepared to tell your “story”

Logistical Needs of the Team

The Team Room Comfortable and well organized (snacks are

good too) Evidence of preparation, paper, web and

other electronic resources Prepare any “how to” guides for the team Provide maps of the campus Be sure the team room is conveniently

located What really happens in the team room?

Optimal Team Experiences While on Campus

Provide a variety of opportunities for engagement on campus

Structure discussions around the themes of dialogue, SLOs, institutional commitments, evaluation, planning, improvement, organization and institutional integrity

Arrange meetings with shared governance committees

Allow time to walk around, observe classes, visit staff in their offices

“Red Flag” Situations

College members with “an agenda”; fellow team members with “an agenda”: look for evidence and follow the standards

Tampering with the self-study (i.e., authors of the self evaluation report that their work has been changed in the version sent to the team)

Significant campus issues not reflected in the self study

Campus constituency who report being excluded from the self evaluation process

Post Visit Suggestions

Don’t wait for the team report to address known weaknesses

Maintain focus on institutional quality, not compliance

Develop a comprehensive and realistic plan for addressing recommendations

Address recommendations in the spirit of the standards; don’t throw out what’s good to meet Commission demands

Questions?