1

2004 SACS / COC Meeting

Professional Development Session 9

Quality Enhancement Plan 101

Dr. Rudolph Jackson, Associate Executive Director, SACS/COC

Dr. Margaret Sullivan, Director, Consulting Network, SACS/COC

  1. Opening Remarks
  • QEP process and requirements
  • New
  • Evolving
  • QEP must focus on student learning outcomes
  • Student Learning Outcomes
  • Specific, very carefully stated
  • Measurable
  • Baseline data on the outcomes
  • Specific interventions to improve the outcomes
  • Multiple assessments of the QEP progress and success
  1. Emerging Issues
  • Emerging Issue # 1
  • Need to address how do we plan to manage the QEP after the on-site team leaves the campus
  • 2-3-5 years management plan (implementation plan)
  • address administrative objectives and
  • address student learning outcomes
  • 2-3-5 years financial plan for the QEP
  • E.g., attending conferences
  • Emerging Issue # 2
  • Pre-planning needed for the QEP planning
  • Inform faculty and staff how
  • How new process is different from the traditional self-study
  • What is compliance certification
  • What is the role of QEP in reaffirmation process
  • Emerging Issue # 3
  • Understanding that QEP is a “do or die type of project”
  • Importance of QEP cannot be minimized
  • It is one of 12 Core Requirements (former Conditions of Eligibility)
  • QEP is “a natural illustration that your institution performs well, that you can plan, you can assess, and you can bring about change in the student behavior”

III.Quality Enhancement Plan

  • What is Quality Enhancement Plan?
  • Student Learning. We cannot overemphasize this.
  • Many pilot QEP did not relate to student learning. Extreme example:
  • “New parking lot” – student come on time to class – student learn more and better
  • “Building 5 smart classrooms”
  • Goal of QEP is to change student learning in the smart classrooms and collect assessment data to demonstrate that student learning changed in fact
  • There are three things you need to consider in regard to Student Learning
  • What can student do
  • What do they know
  • How they think or in what they believe
  • QEP is an integral part of the institution does in terms of institution’s mission and strategic plan, not an add-on
  • How do you begin developing QEP topic?
  • Focus groups –what are the salient issues related to student learning for our campus?
  • Surveys
  • Voting on the issues (web-based)
  • Early QEPs
  • Focused on retention
  • “Beware of taking that route!”
  • What the reviewers want to see in your QEP is not that you are able to retain more students, they want to see that the students have improved in their learning and achievement, and that they have been retained as a by-product of what institutions has done to improve student learning
  • Do not rely on the QEPs that were approved, remember QEP process is new and evolving and the early QEPs probably are not the best models
  • We do not want to use early QEPs as the models of what we hope to see in the coming years
  • Remember QEP must be institution-specific – do not rely on early QEPs

IV.Components of a good QEP

  • Grows out of institutional strategic plan
  • Based on the data-based analysis of institutional strengths and weaknesses
  • Based on the data-based analysis of strengths and weaknesses of student learning on campus
  • QEP does not have to address weakness, it might address strength that you want to enhance, publicize, market
  1. Component 1. Topic / Descriptive Title
  2. One way to get in trouble is to choose a topic that is too broad
  3. Pick a narrow topic and give depth to this topic – think of a tall lean person
  4. Best descriptive so far “Write On” (writing across curriculum to improve student writing in the areas of grammar, form, development, etc.)
  5. Catchy tile!
  6. Good QEP can be a good grant proposal
  7. Component 2. Campus involvement
  8. Evidence of broad-based campus involvement in development and consensus on the QEP
  9. Component 3. Baseline data.
  10. Remember QEP is based on data
  11. Must have baseline data to gauge progress and success
  12. Component 4. Literature review
  13. To support your need statement
  14. To show the significance of the project
  15. To identify best practices and strategies
  16. Include a person on the QEP committee who knows and likes library research and can write well
  17. Component 5. Goals Section
  18. Student Learning Outcomes (Never to be forgotten)
  19. Remember to have baseline data on the outcomes
  20. Administrative objectives
  21. Component 6. Interventions
  22. QEP text should be sprinkled liberally with literature references and best practices in other institutions
  23. Component 7. Assessment plan
  24. If you have non-compliance with 2.5., 3.3.1., 3.4.1 in compliance certification, you will probably have problems with QEP assessment plan
  25. Assessment plan needs to include
  26. Assessment of administrative behavior
  27. Project itself
  28. Student outcomes
  29. Component 8. Management plan
  30. Start 2 years before the reaffirmation and run 3-4 years after reaffirmation
  31. Do not expect committee to manage the implementation. Committees are usually not good managers
  32. Make the chair of the QEP a director of the project and transform the QEP committee in an advisory body to monitor the progress of the QEP implementation
  33. Management plan needs to include communication component, identify reporting lines, strategies to disseminate info to campus constituencies
  34. Component 9. QEP Budget
  35. Start 2 years before the reaffirmation and run 3-4 years after reaffirmation
  36. Remember that QEP is a top priority project. Your accreditation will rest on the quality of this plan
  37. Make sure you have personnel costs
  38. director (FT or PT)
  39. QEP staff;
  40. travel to the conferences for the people involved in the project
  41. keep current

V.Evaluation of the QEP

  1. Focus of the plan
  2. Often QEPs have very strong goals and objectives, but have to do very little with student learning
  3. Make sure QEP focuses on Student Learning
  4. How meaningful is the project for the campus? What will be changed?
  5. Literature Review
  6. It is important to establish context for the project
  7. Institutional capability
  8. Make someone responsible for the QEP project and keeping QEP as institutional priority – motivate people, inform constituencies, ensure that deadlines are met, etc. (“QEP Tsar/Champion”) – need to have adequate authority and support
  9. Assessment of the plan
  10. How do you know that you are successful? What measures do you plan to use? Can you use existing instruments?
  11. Make sure you have assessment plans and instrument to assess each outcome and intervention
  12. Multiple measures of success on the outcomes
  13. Need to assess multiple student groups
  14. Need to assess faculty to gauge their reaction to the QEP
  15. Need to train faculty and staff in assessment
  16. Start developing assessment instruments and training prior to the reaffirmation review
  17. Include assessment costs in the budget
  18. Assessment of the QEP MUST be integrated in your regular annual institutional assessment process in terms of forms and calendar
  19. Assess on an annual basis! Compare student performance on the outcomes each year of the implementation
  20. Document the changes you made to the QEP based on the assessment results – QEP is a living document -- it can be and should be modified if assessment results indicate such need
  21. Broad-based involvement
  22. Minimally need to involve and document involvement of
  23. Faculty
  24. Students
  25. Staff
  26. Administrators, and
  27. Board members
  28. Make sure that you include students and board members on the QEP Committee
  29. Surveys
  30. Focus groups
  31. Document involvement
  32. Project design, intervention methods
  33. Timeline
  34. Develop schedule of activities
  35. Identify deadlines
  36. Budget
  37. It is important not just to have a budget for 3-5 years of implementation, it is also important to have an indication of long-term commitment to the project (e.g., approval of and commitment to the QEP)
  38. Do not put all budget resources on the first two years, ensure that years 3-5 are adequately funded ( remember Impact Report is due on the fifth year)

VI.Impact Report

  1. In the end of the 5-year period

VII.On-Site Review

  1. Responsibility of the on-site review team is to establish the extent to which the institutional QEP is acceptable
  2. Even if QEP is acceptable, the institution still can get recommendations
  3. Institution can choose two members of the on-site team that have expertise in the area of the institutional QEP– two Lead Evaluators (will serve without pay). Carefully choose the evaluators. Don’t need to find a world-class expert.
  4. QEP is sent to the on-site review team
  5. If you have any concerns expressed by the off-site team in regard to the Compliance Certification, you address them in the Focused Report. This report is also sent to the on-site review team
  6. On-site review team will focus on the QEP and the concerns identified by the off-site review team
  7. They will focus on the components of the QEP identified above
  8. During the on-site visit, the team members may set up interviews with individuals responsible for the QEP development and implementation, representatives of campus community, may request additional documents
  9. The first day ( ½ a day)the team will focus on the Compliance Certification issues identified by the off-site committee, the second day (full day) the team will focus on the QEP, the third day ( ½ a day) – exit interview

VIII.Questions

  • The institution contacts the potential Lead Evaluators to determine their interest to serve and availability, send their names and justification why they were selected to the SACS/COC. SACS/COC reviews the candidates. Official invitation is sent to approved Lead Evaluators by the SACS/COC
  • Does QEP should include all student body or focus on a selected group?
  • Does not have to address the whole student body. But remember to provide justification why the particular group of students has been selected. (“Wonderful example” – one school focused not a group of students, but on a group of high risk courses)
  • Remember the purpose of the QEP is to improve student learning
  • What is the biggest difference between the QEP and old self-study?
  • Self-study looked back, QEP looks forward
  • Self-study was based on SACS questions common for all institutions, QEP addresses specific institutional issues
  • What is the role of the Board?
  • The Board provides guidance
  • Survey Board members what topics they think might be significant for student learning
  • Does the QEP have to start before the reaffirmation year?
  • Remember that your QEP might be found unacceptable by the on-site committee, so it might not be wise to start the full-scale implementation before the on-site visit
  • May implement a pilot / demonstration projects based on parts of the QEP to test the plan viability/potential impact
  • Before the visit, make sure you ensure broad-based participation
  • Before the visit, inform / educate / train campus constituencies
  • Before the visit, collect baseline data on the QEP student learning outcomes
  • What is duration of the QEP?
  • 3 to 5 years
  • Can we use our current Title III activities/ plans as a QEP?
  • No, if an activity is currently being implemented, you cannot use it for the QEP. However, you can modify it (e.g., use for different population)

University Assessment Advisory Committee (UAAC)

Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment

2/20/2005