SACS 201

1
SACS 201

• Understanding what is needed to complete the RC
  online submission form for SACS reaffirmation
• ROLLINS COLLEGE
• Sharon Carrier (scarrier_at_rollins.edu)
• September 2003

2
Goals of SACS 201

• YOU WILL LEARN ABOUT
• Determining compliance
• Developing supporting narrative and evidence
• Using the RC Online Form (practice)

3
Assignmentsfor Compliance Certification

• Primary Has ultimate responsibility for the
  SACS requirement.
• Secondary Is responsible for the represented
  unit/division's role in complying with the SACS
  requirement.
• Respondent Under the direction of the
  secondary, is responsible for the represented
  unit/division's response for the SACS
  requirement.
• Contributor Contributes accurate, thorough, and
  timely information to the primaries, secondaries,
  or respondents.

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
Narrative to Support Evaluation

• Compliance A brief and persuasive argument in
  support of this determination.
• Partial Compliance A brief and persuasive
  argument in support of the areas of compliance,
  the reasons for partial compliance, and a summary
  of action plans to bring division/unit into full
  compliance by January 2005.
• Non-Compliance The reasons for checking
  non-compliance and specific action plans to bring
  division/unit into full compliance by January
  2005.

11
Narrative

• Justification for evaluation statement
  (convincing case for Off-Site Committee to
  determine compliance or partial compliance)
• Interpretation of and meaningful conclusions
  drawn from documentation/evidence
• Excerpts from evidence, as appropriate
• Summaries of lengthy and complex data
• Action plan, if in partial or non-compliance

12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Descriptive List of Evidence

• Compliance A list and a brief description of
  evidence/supporting documentation.
• Partial Compliance A list and a brief
  description of evidence/supporting documentation
  and how evidence will show full compliance by
  January 2005.
• Non-Compliance A list and a brief description of
  evidence that will be used in documenting full
  compliance by January 2005.

16
Evidence

• Should draw from multiple indicators
• Represent a combination of trend and snapshot
  data
• Examples survey data, benchmarking, student
  satisfaction indices, nationally-normed student
  learning outcomes results, major field test
  scores, licensure/certification rates, program
  accreditation results, program peer review
  results, focus group findings

17
SACS says Evidence must be . . .

• Reliable. The evidence can be consistently
  interpreted.
• Current. The information supports an assessment
  of the current status of the institution.
• Verifiable. The meaning assigned to the evidence
  can be corroborated, and the information can be
  replicated.

18

• Coherent. The evidence is orderly, logical, and
  consistent with other patterns of evidence
  presented.
• Objective. The evidence is based on observable
  data and information.
• Relevant. The evidence directly addresses the
  requirement or standard under consideration and
  should provide the basis for the institutions
  actions designed to achieve compliance.
• Representative. Evidence must reflect a larger
  body of evidence and not an isolated case.

19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
Rollins Reaffirmation Timeline

• Spring-Summer 2003 ALT communicates assignments
  of SACS compliance requirements.
• Spring-Fall 2003 Rollins addresses compliance
  gaps ALT hosts SACS 101 and 201 information
  sessions.
• Fall 2003-Spring 2004 Respondents submit online
  compliance determination, narrative, and
  evidence secondaries and primaries review and
  approve by designated dates ALT
  reviews/integrates responses.

25
Rollins Reaffirmation Timeline

• Fall 2003-Fall 2004 Rollins discusses/develops
  QEP.
• Fall (Aug.) 2004 Rollins submits Compliance
  Certification, which includes QEP proposal.
• Fall (Nov.) 2004 SACS Off-Site Committee
  reviews Rollins Compliance Certification.
• Spring (Jan.) 2005 Rollins submits QEP to SACS.
• Spring (March/April) 2005 On-Site Committee
  visits Rollins, focuses on any compliance gaps
  and QEP.

26
SACS 201
Questions Answers

• ROLLINS COLLEGE