SACS Reaffirmation:

1
SACS Reaffirmation The Visit
ASERL Spring Membership Meeting, April 2009
John E. Ulmschneider Virginia Commonwealth
University
2
Step One Off-Site Review
3
Step Two On-Site Review
4
Compliance elements involving libraries

• Specific library elements are Core Requirement
  2.9 and Comprehensive Standards 3.8.1, 3.8.2, and
  3.8.3.
• Library may contribute in other areas 3.2.14
  3.3.1 3.4.12.
• Core Requirement 2.9 is foundational, broad, and
  focuses on institutional commitment.
• Comprehensive Standard 3.8 is more specific to
  the operation of the library system at the
  institution.

5
Library considerations for showing compliance

• Remember there are no quantitative or
  qualitative standards. The institution makes the
  case with the data and argument it considers
  appropriate.
• Comprehensive profile of library system is
  essential to showing compliance fullest possible
  description showing all library assets that
  support and advance the institution, including
  collaborative arrangements, expenditures, etc.
• Benchmarking data might be useful for 2.9 but
  it is only one element and may have a minor
  presence in the overall statement for 2.9.
• LibQUAL and (underscore and) other assessment
  metrics and processes are indispensable for in
  3.8. This includes mechanisms to get regular
  input from constituencies.

6
Library considerations for QEP

• Beware libraries are often overlooked in the QEP
  development process.
• The consequence libraries may end up with little
  visibility in the QEP.
• Seek involvement. Be alert to opportunities for
  participation. Institutional commitment and
  resource allocation to QEP can be large.
• Where can the library system contribute to the
  QEP?
• Where can the library system strengthen the QEP?
• Remember, there may not be a librarian on the
  On-Site Peer Review Committee to raise questions
  about the library system in the QEP. Or the
  librarian may perceive such questions as crossing
  the line into advocacy a major league no-no.