Middle States SelfStudy

1
Middle States Self-Study

• Salisbury University
• 2003-2006

2
What is a Middle States accreditation?

• 10-year interval of self-examination, external
  review, and commission approval (with a 5 year
  Periodic Review Report) that an institution meets
  specified regional standards of quality
• Initial approval is accreditation subsequent
  renewal is reaccreditation
• A requirement for receiving federal funding
  (student financial aid grants and loans, federal
  grants, etc.)
• In the Middle States region, affirmation of 14
  standards of higher education achievement

3
Why accreditation?

• The good housekeeping seal of approval for
  proprietary schools, colleges, and universities,
  primary and secondary school systems
• An honest look at the Universitys demonstrated
  strengths and challenges
• Institutional renewalopportunity to renew
  strengths, assess continuing challenges, and
  identify new challenges
• Consensus recommendations for the next decade

4
What does Middle States mean?
5
Regional Commissions of the Council for Higher
Education Accreditation

• New England
• Southern
• North Central
• Western
• Northwest
• Middle States--serving New York, New Jersey,
  Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, the District of
  Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
  Islands, as well as the Mid-East, Near-East,
  Africa, and Europe.

6
Goals of SUs Self-Study

• The Middle States Self-Study provides a forum to
  conduct a comprehensive review of SUs
  suppositions, practices, programs, personnel,
  policies, and institutional habits. By
  conducting a multiyear, data-driven and
  consensus-based study of its own strengths and
  opportunities for change, Salisbury University
  will
• involve the campus community and constituent
  communities in an assessment of Salisburys
  mission, educational programs, activities,
  ongoing processes of planning, resource
  allocation, and institutional renewal
• provide a framework for continual improvement of
  Salisbury Universitys educational and
  administrative inclusiveness and effectiveness
• enhance the shared understanding of Salisburys
  central purpose as an educational institution
• create a common vision of where the institution
  will go in the future and
• provide comprehensive and coherent
  recommendations for Salisbury Universitys next
  decade (2006-16)recommendations that have been
  carefully crafted, assessed, and affirmed by its
  constituencies.

7
What is the timeline and process for Salisbury?

• v Fall 2003 Steering committee of the self
  study appointed
• v Spring 2004 Creating the self-study design
• Fall 2004 Campus affirmation and Middle States v
  approval of the design v formation of working
  groups. Nov 5thCampus visit by Middle States
  liaison
• Spring 2005 Working groups investigate and write
  their reports
• Summer 2005 First draft of the self-study report
  
• Fall 2005 Completion of reportCampus visit by
  team chair
• February 2006 (3-1/2 days) 10-member team visit
• Spring and summer 2006 Commission action (spring
  and summer 2006) and any campus response

8
Choice of the Self-Study Design

• Comprehensive (60-75 of Middle States
  institutions)
• Comprehensive with special emphasis/emphases
  (13-28)
• Special focus periodic self-study (12)
• After discussion, the steering committee narrowed
  its options to
• comprehensive review
• comprehensive review with special emphasis (with
  diversity, resource allocation, and institutional
  renewal as contenders for such special emphasis)
• Decision the committee chose
• a comprehensive review process in which
  diversity, resource allocation, and institutional
  renewal are central components within its working
  groupsa characteristic example of consensus work
  that marked the steering committees
  deliberations.
• Five working groups that combine the 14 standards
  SUs six values (excellence, student-centerednes
  s, learning, community, civic engagement,
  diversity)

9
What have we accomplished so far?

• The Self-Study Design Document
• Five Working Groups with over 75 campus
  participants
• 1. Academic Excellence Faculty and Curriculum
• 2. Student-Centeredness, Mission, and
  Institutional Identity
• 3. Diversity and Globalization
• 4. Community Engagement, Governance, and
  Leadership
• 5. Planning, Resource Allocation, and
  Institutional Renewal
• 258 analytical charging questions (38 to 69 per
  working group)
• Approval of the design (7/1/04)Middle States
  indicates the design is overall an excellent
  one, and it reflects the very active
  participation of the steering committee and
  working groups, particularly in the development
  of thoughtful charge questions.

10
What will each Working Group do?

• assess the Universitys current effectiveness in
  meeting the specific categories and Middle States
  standards assigned to it
• write a 25-page report (6300 words) plus tables,
  charts and appendices, responding to its charging
  questions, submitted to the self-study chair by
  May 1, 2005
• make a clear set of recommendations for the next
  decade to address topics the working group
  considers necessary.

11
14 Standards

• Std 1 Mission, Goals, and Objectives
• Std 2 Planning, Resource Allocation, and
  Institutional Renewal
• Std 3 Institutional Resources
• Std 4 Leadership and Governance
• Std 5 Administration
• Std 6 Integrity
• Std 7 Institutional Assessment

• Std 8 Student Admissions
• St. 9 Student Support Services
• Std 10 Faculty
• Std 11Educational Offerings
• Std 12 General Education
• Std 13 Related Educational Activities
• Std 14 Assessment of Student Learning

12
Standard 1Mission, Goals, and Objectives

• The institutions mission clearly defines its
  purposes within the context of higher education
  and explains whom the institution serves and what
  it intends to accomplish.
• The institutions stated goals and objectives,
  consistent with the aspirations and expectations
  of higher education, clearly specify how the
  institution will fulfill its mission.
• The mission, goals, and objectives are developed
  and recognized by the institution with its
  members and its governing body and are utilized
  to develop and shape its programs and practices
  and to evaluate its effectiveness. (Working
  Groups 2 and 4)

13
Standard 2 Planning, Resource Allocation, and
Institutional Renewal

• An institution conducts planning and resource
  allocation on its mission and utilizes the
  results of its assessment activities for
  institutional renewal.
• Implementation and subsequent evaluation of the
  success of the strategic plan and resource
  allocation support the development and change
  necessary to improve and to maintain
  institutional quality. (Working Group 5)

14
Standard 3 Institutional Resources

• The human, technical, physical facilities and
  other resources necessary to achieve an
  institutions mission and goals are available and
  accessible.
• In the context of the institutions mission, the
  effective and efficient uses of the institutions
  resources are analyzed as part of ongoing
  outcomes assessment. (Working Group 5)

15
Standard 4 Leadership and Governance

• The institutions system of governance clearly
  defines the roles of institutional constituencies
  in policy development and decision-making.
• The governance structure includes an active
  governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure
  institutional integrity and to fulfill its
  responsibilities of policy and resource
  development, consistent with the mission of the
  institution. (Working Group 4)

16
Standard 5 Administration

• The institutions administrative structure and
  services facilitate learning and
  research/scholarship, foster the improvement of
  quality, and support the institutions
  recognition and governance. (Working Group 4)

17
Standard 6 Integrity

• In the conduct of its programs and activities
  involving the public and the constituencies it
  serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to
  ethical standards and its own stated policies,
  providing support to academic and intellectual
  freedom. (Working Groups 1, 2, 4, and 5)

18
Standard 7 Institutional Assessment

• The institution has developed and implemented an
  assessment plan and process that evaluates its
  overall effectiveness in
• achieving its mission and goals
• implementing planning, resource allocation, and
  institutional renewal processes
• using institutional resources efficiently
• providing leadership and governance
• providing administrative structures and services
• demonstrating institutional integrity
• and assuring that institutional processes and
  resources support appropriate learning and other
  outcomes for its students and graduates. (Working
  Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

19
Standard 8 Student Admissions

• The institution seeks to admit students whose
  interests, goals, and abilities are congruent
  with its mission. (Working Groups 2 and 3)

20
Standard 9 Student Support Services

• The institution provides student services
  reasonably necessary to enable each student to
  achieve the institutions goals for students.
  (Working Groups 2 and 3)

21
Standard 10 Faculty

• The institutions instructional, research, and
  service programs are devised, developed,
  monitored, and supported by qualified
  professionals. (Working Groups 1 and 3)

22
Standard 11 Educational Offerings

• The institutions educational offerings display
  academic content, rigor, and coherence that are
  appropriate to its higher educational mission.
• The institution identifies student learning goals
  and objectives, including knowledge and skills,
  for its educational offerings. (Working Groups 1
  and 3)

23
Standard 12 General Education

• The institutions curricula are designed so that
  the students acquire and demonstrate
  college-level proficiency in general education
  and essential skills, including
• oral and written communication,
• scientific and quantitative reasoning,
• critical analysis and reasoning,
• technological competency,
• and information literacy (Working Groups 1 and 3)
  

24
Standard 13 Related Educational Activities

• Institutional programs or activities that are
  characterized by the following meet appropriate
  standards
• particular content,
• focus,
• location,
• mode of delivery,
• or sponsorship (Working Groups 1 and 3)

25
Standard 14 Assessment of Student Learning

• Assessment of student learning demonstrates
• that the institutions students have the
  knowledge, skills, and competencies consistent
  with institutional goals
• and that students at graduation have achieved
  appropriate higher education goals. (Working
  Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

26
Middle States Steering Committee

• Member
• Robin Adamopoulos
• Anita Brown
• David Buchanan
• Kerri Jones Bunting
• Grace Clement
• Sandra Cohea-Weible
• Betty Crockett
• Ron Dotterer
• Charles Emery
• John Fields
• Susan Muller
• Darrell Newton
• Bryant Penn
• Bryan Price
• Elizabeth Rankin
• Lesley Schiff
• Brenda Stanley
• Rosemary Thomas

• Relationship with the SU Community
• Graduate student
• Assistant Professor of Chemistry (alumna)
• Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
• Alumni Association (alumna)
• Associate Professor of Philosophy and Department
  Chair
• Liaison from Academic Affairs to the steering
  committee
• Associate Vice President for Administration and
  Finance (alumna)
• Professor of English and Self-Study Chair
• Board of Directors Member Salisbury University
  Foundation
• Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs
  (alumnus)
• Associate Professor of Physical Education and
  Faculty Senator
• Assistant Professor of Communication and Theatre
  Arts
• Undergraduate student
• Director of Institutional Research, Assessment,
  and Accountability
• Professor of Nursing
• Staff Technician in Blackwell Library and MCEA
  representative
• Telecommunications Manager and Staff Senate
  representative
• Vice President for University Advancement

27
Steering Committee Working Groups
28
Group 1 Academic Excellence Faculty and
Curriculum

• Anita Brown, Assistant Professor of Chemistry
  (alumna) and Ying Wu, Associate Professor of
  Business (co-chairs). Michael Garner, Professor
  of Accounting (co-chair, spring 2005)
• Sandra Cohea-Weible (Assistant Vice President for
  Academic Affairs)
• Thomas Jones (Dean of the Henson School of
  Science and Technology)
• Nancy Michaelson (Associate Professor of
  Education)
• Fran Sistrunk (Instructor of Social Work)
• Donald Spickler (Assistant Professor of Math and
  Computer Sciences)
• Tony Whall (Director of the Honors Program and
  Professor of English)
• Arlene White (Associate Professor of Modern
  Languages and General Education Coordinator)
• an additional staff member
• undergraduate student

29
Group 2 Student-Centeredness, Mission, and
Institutional Identity

• Byron Hughes Area Director, Housing Resident
  Life (alumnus) and Brenda Stanley,
  Telecommunications Manager (alumna) Staff
  Senate rep (co-chairs)
• Robin Adamopoulos (graduate student)
• Jennifer Berkman (Director of Student Health
  Services)
• David Gutoskey (Assistant Director of
  Housing/Residence Life)
• Jason Jacoski (undergraduate student)
• Kathryn Kalmanson (Head Reference Librarian)
• Timothy ORourke (Dean of the Fulton School of
  Liberal Arts)
• Bryant Penn (undergraduate student)
• Laura Thorpe (Director of Admissions)
• Ellen Zinner (Assistant to the President)
• 4 faculty, one from each school

30
Group 3 Diversity and Globalization

• Grace Clement, Associate Professor of Philosophy,
  Department Chair, and Darrell Newton, Assistant
  Professor of Communication and Theatre Arts
  (co-chairs)
• Marvin Ames (Buildings and Grounds, MCEA
  representative)
• Alice Bahr (Dean of Libraries and Instructional
  Resources)
• Carolyn Bowden (Associate Professor of Education)
• Kevin Carreathers (Assistant to the VP of
  Academic Affairs for Institutional Diversity)
• James Forte (Assistant Professor of Social Work)
• Robert Hallworth, Director of International
  Education
• Agata Liszkowska (Co-ordinator of International
  Student Services)
• Anjali Panday (Associate Professor of English)
• Jing Quan (Assistant Professor of Information and
  Decision Sciences)
• Gerald St. Martin (Professor of Modern Languages)
• Rosemary Thomas (Vice President for University
  Advancement)
• Janine Vienna (M.B.A. Director)
• Vaughan White (Director of Multiethnic Student
  Services)
• Candace Wimberly (undergraduate student,
  president of NAACP)

31
Group 4 Community Engagement, Governance, and
Leadership

• John Fields, Assistant Vice President for Student
  Affairs (alumnus) and Susan Muller, Associate
  Professor of Physical Education (alumna) and
  Faculty Senator (co-chairs)
• Robin Bowen (Campus Recreation)
• Kerrie Jones Bunting (Alumni Association board
  member and alumna)
• Charles Emery (Salisbury University Foundation
  board member)
• Bill Folger (Assistant Professor of Music)
• Francis Kane (Co-Director Public Affairs and
  Civic Engagement Institute and Professor of
  Philosophy)
• Dennis Pataniczek (Dean of the Seidel School of
  Education and Professional Studies)
• David Parker (Professor of Math and Computer
  Science)
• James Phillips (Chief, University Police)
• Lesley Schiff (Technician in Blackwell Library
  and MCEA representative)
• George Whitehead (Professor of Psychology)
• undergraduate student

32
Group 5 Planning, Resource Allocation, and
Institutional Renewal

• Betty Crockett, Associate Vice President for
  Administration and Finance (alumna) and Elizabeth
  Rankin (Professor of Nursing) (co-chair spring
  and fall 2004). Robert Tardiff Professor of
  Mathematics (co-chair, spring 2005-on)
• John Bing (Professor of Education)
• David Buchanan (Provost and Vice President for
  Academic Affairs)
• Debra Clark (Executive Administrative Assistant,
  Seidel School of Education and Professional
  Studies)
• Wayne Decker (Professor of Business
  Administration)
• Elizabeth Emmert (Assistant Professor of Biology)
• Lisa Gray (Assistant Director of Book Rack)
• Bryan Horikami (Advising Co-ordinator, Fulton
  School of Liberal Arts)
• Kevin Mann (Director of Physical Plant/Building
  Trades)
• Willie Moore (Dean of the Perdue School of
  Business)
• Kim Nechay (Assistant Director, SU Foundation)
• Bryan Price (Director of Institutional
  Assessment, Research and Accountability)
• Melissa Thomas (Instructional Designer for
  Teaching Learning Network Staff Senate chair)
• Undergraduate student

33
For continually updated information

• Or to read more about the Middle States
  self-study and to find Middle States publications
• Check the Salisbury University Middle States
  website at

http//www.salisbury.edu/iara/Accreditation/Welcom
e.htm