neasc-cis survey analysis prepared by: niki lamberg & ana volpi (617) 869-8695 [email protected] ...

NEASC-CIS Survey Analysis

Prepared by: Niki Lamberg & Ana Volpi

(617) 869-8695 [email protected] www.nlamberg.com

Overview of survey response• Response rates were quite high (typical

customer/member response rates are 5-15%, higher ed response rates are ~33%)• CIHE = 43%• CPS = 51%• CAISA = 67%• CIS Head of School = 47%

• Response rate indicates that members are engaged with NEASC and want to have input into its future

• Abandon rates were low to average (typical abandon rates for surveys of this length are 15-25%)• CIHE = 12%• CPS = 23% • CAISA = 11%


*Response rate for CIS Head of School is not available because HOS cohort was sliced using responses to demographic questions at the end of the survey. Total CIS abandon rate was 18%.

Dedication to ongoing accreditation varies

CAISA CIS-HOS CPS

61.5%

40.1%

15.9%

36.8%

54.0%

44.3%

1.7% 5.8%

39.9%Becoming less of a priority; we just can-not do it all.

More difficult to find time for, but still valuable

More valuable than ever


% o

f R

esp

onse

s

In light of the school improvement activities outlined above that are competing for your attention, how do you view accreditation?

Clarity that participating in a visiting team is excellent professional development

CAISA CIS-HOS CPS CIHE0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

4.67 4.534.10

4.53

Average Rating(617) 869-8695 [email protected] www.nlamberg.com

Rati

ng

“Participating on a visiting team is excellent professional development”

(1 indicates “Strongly Disagree”, 5 indicates “Strongly Agree”)

CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:Participating on a visiting team is excellent professional development


Q: How well do the following statements represent your perceptions about NEASC and its Commission on Independent Schools (CIS)? Participating on a visiting team is excellent professional development.

Elementary

Secondary

60%

66%

32%

29%

6%

6%

0%

0%

1%

0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree/Neutral Disagree

Strongly disagree

N=123

N=79

NEASC’s K-16 breadth is valued . . .


0.51

1.52

2.53

3.54

4.55

4.21 4.06 4.243.43


Rati

ng

“I value NEASC’s K-16 breadth – accrediting in public, independent, and international schools as well as higher education -- throughout New England and abroad.”


. . . In fact, respondents want more shared discussion of common issues


0.51

1.52

2.53

3.54

4.55

3.92 3.67 3.70 3.41


Rati

ng

“I wish NEASC would engage K-16 NEASC-accredited schools, colleges and universities in shared discussion of common issues, such as online/virtual education.”


CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:

Valuing breadth of NEASC


Q: How well do the following statements represent your perceptions about NEASC and its Commission on Independent Schools (CIS)? I value NEASC’s K-16 breadth – accrediting in public, independent, and international schools as well as higher education -- throughout New England and abroad.

Elementary

Secondary

37%

32%

46%

39%

13%

26%

3%

2%

1%

0%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree/Neutral DisagreeStrongly disagree

N=123

N=79

A Closer Look: CIS Heads of School

• Respondents really value accreditation:• 40%: it is more valuable than ever• Only 5.8%: it is becoming less of a priority• 93% agreed: “Accreditation matters.”• 89% agreed: Accreditation gives institutional

credibility• 88% agreed: Self-study strengthened school

community• This finding is particularly striking, given the fact that

many cited the time and effort involved as a negative.


CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:View of Accreditation


Q: In light of the school improvement activities outlined above that are competing for your attention, how do you view accreditation?

Elementary

Secondary

46%

33%

49%

58%

5%

9%

More valuable than ever

More difficult to find time for, but still valuable.

Becoming less of a priority; we just cannot do it all.

N=123

N=79

CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons: Accreditation Matters


Q: How well does the following statement represent your beliefs about accreditation? Accreditation matters.

Elementary

Secondary

-

0.5

0

1.0

0

1.5

0

2.0

0

2.5

0

3.0

0

3.5

0

4.0

0

4.5

0

5.0

0

4.46

4.46

N=123

N=79

CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons: A Catalyst for Change


Q: How well does the following statement represent your beliefs about accreditation? Accreditation serves as a catalyst for change within our school.

Elementary

Secondary

-

0.5

0

1.0

0

1.5

0

2.0

0

2.5

0

3.0

0

3.5

0

4.0

0

4.5

0

5.0

0

4.24

4.05

N=123

N=79


Self-Study


Q: How well do the following statements represent your beliefs about accreditation? The self-study component of accreditation strengthens our school community.

Elementary

Secondary

-

0.5

0

1.0

0

1.5

0

2.0

0

2.5

0

3.0

0

3.5

0

4.0

0

4.5

0

5.0

0

4.22

4.23

N=123

N=79

CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:Even if accreditation had no impact on higher education admissions, we would continue to seek accreditation because there is great value in the process itself.


Q: How well do the following statements represent your beliefs about accreditation? Even if accreditation had no impact on higher education admissions, we would continue to seek accreditation because there is great value in the process itself.

Elementary

Secondary

-

0.5

0

1.0

0

1.5

0

2.0

0

2.5

0

3.0

0

3.5

0

4.0

0

4.5

0

5.0

0

4.03

4.04

N=123

N=79

CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:Gives Credibility


Q: How well do the following statements represent your beliefs about accreditation? Accreditation gives us credibility as an institution.

Elementary

Secondary

-

0.5

0

1.0

0

1.5

0

2.0

0

2.5

0

3.0

0

3.5

0

4.0

0

4.5

0

5.0

0

4.38

4.11

N=123

N=79


• How respondents would like to be evaluated:• 33% (majority): wanted balance between the

extent to which they meet best practices and the extent to which they fully embody their mission

• Leaning somewhat toward mission-based side (3.28/5 agreement rating, with 5 being very focused on mission).

• Most valuable aspect of accreditation:

• 60%: opportunity to ask hard questions• 15% (far second): unique mission definition(617) 869-8695 [email protected] www.nlamberg.com


NEASC-CIS Measuring Stick


Q: Against which measuring stick would you prefer NEASC-CIS evaluate your school?

Elementary

Secondary

23%

12%

6%

11%

34%

28%

19%

19%

27%

30%

The extent to which we meet standards of educational best practice

Leaning toward best practice

Neutral/equal

Leaning toward mission

The extent to which we fully embody our mission

N=123

N=79


• Balancing standards: best practices vs. flexibility? • 41% (majority): keep standards where they are

now• Agreement rating 3.47/5, with 5 being highly

flexible

• Respondents would like (in order of importance): 1. Help in sharing their accreditation with

stakeholders2. Individualizing interim reporting to focus on

each improvement area3. Going paperless


CIS Elementary HOS vs. CIS Secondary HOS Comparisons:How appropriate are: Standards for accreditation


Q: How appropriate are the NEASC-CIS current standards, policies, and processes? Standards for accreditation

Elementary

Secondary

44%

38%

49%

54%

8%

7%

0%

1%

Extremely appropriate Mostly appropriate Somewhat appropriate

Not very appropriate Not at all appropriate

N=123

N=79


Ongoing relationship with NEASC-CIS


Q: How well do the following statements represent your perceptions about NEASC and its Commission on Independent Schools (CIS)? I have a relationship with NEASC-CIS professionals that is ongoing and not just limited to the year(s) of our self-study and site visit.

Elementary

Secondary

22%

17%

33%

33%

32%

31%

8%

16%

5%

3%

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree/Neutral DisagreeStrongly disagree

N=123

N=79

NEASC Actions to consider: Online presence

• Resource(s) managing content creation and management could be shared across commissions

• Need for ongoing push outreach to members• Monthly newsletter for each commission sent out via

email• Social media

• Does not need to be net new content, can just be used to alert followers to new content availability

• In future, creates a forum to engage members in discussion of common issues and interests

• Need for a user-friendly repository of resources (pull)• Whitepapers• Examples of plans, policies, etc.• Best practices

• Show value by mining existing knowledge to showcase excellence and best practices and help members solve problems


NEASC Actions to consider: K-16/20 thought leadership

• Show value by mining existing knowledge to showcase excellence and best practices and help members solve problems

• K-16/20 breadth is a unique attribute of NEASC, when compared to other accreditors (AdvancEd, other regional accreditors)

• Become the “go-to” resource for thinking and ideas about the real world challenges across the spectrum of education, not just for members, but policy makers and the public—a one-stop shop

• Become the facilitator/convener of a safe zone for members to have candid conversations with their peers across K-16/20• “It’s lonely at the top”—Principals/Heads of

School/Presidents may not have peers they can commiserate with or bounce ideas off

• Have more small group, local peer-to-peer get-togethers and informal meetings


neasc-cis survey analysis prepared by: niki lamberg & ana volpi (617) 869-8695 [email protected] ...

Documents

independent schools

cis elementary hos

cis head of school

neasccis survey analysis

cis secondary hos comparisons

total cis abandon rate

neascaccredited schools

visiting team