Marietta College

1
Marietta CollegeAQIP

• A Information/Discussion Session

2
Agenda

• What is AQIP?
• Perceived Advantages
• Potential Pitfalls
• The Process
• AQIP Examiner Survey
• External Observations/Advice
• Campus Commitment
• PEAQ vs. AQIP
• Discussion

3
What is AQIP?

• Academic Quality Improvement Program
• A continuous improvement process
• An alternative process for maintaining HLC
  accreditated status

4
What is a Continuous Improvement Process?

• Process an organized group of related
  activities that taken together create a result of
  value to those it serves
• CI ongoing examination change for the better
• CI Process

5
AQIP Criteria

• Helping Students Learn
• Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives
• Understanding Students and Other Stakeholders
  Needs
• Valuing People
• Leading and Communicating
• Supporting Institutional Operations
• Measuring Effectiveness
• Planning Continuous Improvement
• Building Collaborative Relationships

6
Perceived Advantages

• Forward-looking process (value added)
• Accountability and Transparency
• Continual relationship with HLC
• Consultancy versus Evaluation

7
Potential Pitfalls

• Not a very mature process (1999)
• Accountability expectations evolving
• Cohort group largely unlike MC
• Continual relationship with HLC

8
The Process

• Preliminary Self-Assessment
• Formal Application
• Strategy Forum
• Action Projects
• Annual Updates
• Systems Portfolio
• Systems Appraisal
• Quality Checkup
• Reaffirmation of Accreditation

9
The ProcessSelf-Assessment

• Provides evidence of processed-focused thinking
• Identifies potential opportunities for
  improvement
• One method AQIP Examiner

10
The ProcessFormal Application

• 10-12 page web-based application
• Gauges compliance with Criteria for Accreditation
• Gauges readiness to benefit from participating in
  AQIP

11
The ProcessStrategy Forum

• 3 day event, 6 person team
• Attendance required every 4 years
• Peer review process to aid in the selection of
  Action Projects
• Requires completion of Workbook (10 pages), and
  preparation of an institutional display

12
The ProcessAction Projects

• Designed to improve processes that will lead to
  success in achieving organizational goals
  (continuous improvement)
• 3-4 projects active at all times at least one
  related to student learning
• Projects last as long as it takes to achieve its
  goals
• Action Project Directory transparency

13
The ProcessAnnual Updates

• Due to Action Project Directory 9/14
• Report of progress made, problems encountered,
  and successes
• Electronic feedback posted by 11/19
• Conclusions not directly drawn from whether
  project succeeds or fails

14
The ProcessSystems Portfolio

• Public portfolio describing fundamental
  institutional systems employed to accomplish the
  institutions mission and objectives
• 75-100 page document addressing Institutional
  Overview, Nine AQIP Categories, Five Criteria for
  Accreditation
• Dynamic document

15
The ProcessSystems Appraisal

• Independent and consensus review (of Systems
  Portfolio)
• Conducted every 4 years no site visit required
• Appraisal Feedback Report helps determine next
  targets for advancing quality (through Action
  Projects)
• Lead-in for next Strategy Forum
• Regular improvement expected

16
The ProcessQuality Checkup

• Site visit 2 or more evaluators, 2 or more days
• Confirms claims and accuracy of evidence
• Provides feedback and consultation on issues of
  the institutions choosing
• Advance report (20 pages maximum) detailing
  response to last Systems Appraisal and materials
  related to Federal Compliance required

17
The ProcessReaffirmation of Accreditation

• Reaffirms accredited status
• Every 7 years
• Review panel electronically examines material
  since last reaffirmation
• Index to the Five Criteria for Accreditation (3-5
  pages), a part of the Systems Portfolio, must be
  updated

18
The Process Summary

• Preliminary Self-Assessment
• Formal Application
• Systems Portfolio
• Strategy Forum (every 4 years)
• Action Projects
• Annual Action Projects Updates
• Systems Appraisal (every 4 years)
• Quality Checkup
• Reaffirmation of Accreditation (every 7 years)

19
AQIP Examiner Survey

• 64 participation rate (35 administrators, 62
  faculty, 42 staff)
• Marietta College employees have a good
  understanding of the characteristics of effective
  processes

20
AQIP Examiner Survey

• Positive Broad understanding of Colleges
  mission and organization, campus-wide
  participation in goal setting and analysis of
  performance measures
• Room for improvement in valuing people and
  implementation of changes suggested by
  performance measures

21
External Observations/Advice

• Mostly positive experience
• Ambiguous, open-ended, still maturing
• Strategy Forums very valuable
• No down time
• Campus-wide buy-in critical
• AQIP seems to thrive in smaller, more cohesive
  campus communities
• Choose Action Projects the institution cares
  about rather than choosing Action Projects for
  the sake of AQIP
• Need half/full? dedicated person

22
Campus Commitment

• Action Projects 3-4 projects in play on a
  continuous basis Annual Updates
• Strategy Forums
• Quality Checkups

23
PEAQ vs. AQIP

• Similarities Differences

24
Similarities

• Same dues
• Same annual report (Institutional Research)
• Same fundamental expectations for maintaining
  accreditation
• Same Federal Compliance Program expectations
• Same Criteria for Accreditation

25
PEAQ vs. AQIP
26
PEAQ vs. AQIP
27
PEAQ vs. AQIP
28
PEAQ vs. AQIP
29
PEAQ vs. AQIP
30
Discussion