a library compliance strategy for regional accreditation standards

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 07 October 2014, At: 08:44Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

College & UndergraduateLibrariesPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcul20

A Library Compliance Strategyfor Regional AccreditationStandardsDebbie Malone (BA, Ursinus College; MLS, DrexelUniversity) a & William Neal Nelson (BA, CentenaryCollege of Louisiana; MA, Louisiana State University;MLS, Louisiana State University; PhD, Louisiana StateUniversity) ba DeSales University , 2755 Station Avenue, CenterValley, PA, 18034, USAb Augusta State University , 2500 Walton Way,Augusta, GA, 30904-2200, USAPublished online: 22 Sep 2008.

To cite this article: Debbie Malone (BA, Ursinus College; MLS, Drexel University)& William Neal Nelson (BA, Centenary College of Louisiana; MA, Louisiana StateUniversity; MLS, Louisiana State University; PhD, Louisiana State University) (2006)A Library Compliance Strategy for Regional Accreditation Standards, College &Undergraduate Libraries, 13:1, 89-105, DOI: 10.1300/J106v13n01_10

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J106v13n01_10

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcul20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J106v13n01_10

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J106v13n01_10

are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

A Library Compliance Strategyfor Regional Accreditation Standards:

Using ACRL Higher Education Standardswith the Middle States Commission

Debbie MaloneWilliam Neal Nelson

ABSTRACT. The 2002 standards published by the Middle StatesCommission on Higher Education place less emphasis on quantifiableand arbitrary inputs and more emphasis on outcomes assessment of stu-dent learning. Since these new standards are less prescriptive and more

Debbie Malone (BA, Ursinus College; MLS, Drexel University) is Library Direc-tor, DeSales University, 2755 Station Avenue, Center Valley, PA 18034 (addresse-mail to: [email protected]).

William Neal (Bill) Nelson (BA, Centenary College of Louisiana; MA, LouisianaState University; MLS, Louisiana State University; PhD, Louisiana State University)is Professor and Library Director, Augusta State University, 2500 Walton Way,Augusta, GA 30904-2200 (address e-mail to: [email protected]).

College & Undergraduate Libraries, Vol. 13(1) 2006Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com/web/CUL

© 2006 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1300/J106v13n01_10 89

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.haworthpress.com/web/CUL


diffuse than the previous standards, it is difficult for librarians to deter-mine an appropriate compliance strategy. The authors advocate use ofthe 2004 ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education for assess-ment of an academic library to provide the comprehensive evaluationrequired to demonstrate compliance with the Middle States standards. Acomprehensive listing of the Middle States Commission provisions af-fecting libraries and other material is provided to assist in such an evalu-ation. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document DeliveryService: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2006 by The HaworthPress, Inc. All rights reserved.]

KEY WORDS. Academic libraries, accreditation, ACRL, assessment,evaluation, Middle States Commission on Higher Education, outcomesassessment, planning, standards

The United States is divided into six regions, each of which has anassociation responsible for the accreditation of higher education institu-tions. All six of the regional accrediting associations have rewrittentheir standards in the last several years. These regional standards typi-cally have very vague requirements that relate to libraries and learningresources. As an example, all the revised standards have eliminated aseparate standard for libraries and learning resources and have includedthem within the other sections. One of the most important changes in thestandards has been the new emphasis on student learning outcomes,placing more emphasis on what students learn. Oswald Ratteray, Mid-dle States Commission on Higher Education, says that the revisedstandards for Middle States, “especially the emphasis on informationliteracy as a meta-outcome, could have an impact on higher education inat least three areas: long range planning, especially with regard to as-sessment; a change in the institution-wide dialogue about student learn-ing; and increased collaboration woven into the campus culture”(Ratteray 2002, 374-75).

Nelson and Fernekes reviewed the regional association standards, in-cluding Middle States’ Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Educa-tion 2002, for provisions affecting academic libraries, and categorizedthem by the twelve sections of the 2000 edition of ACRL Standards forCollege Libraries. That analysis was published in Standards and Ac-creditation for Academic Libraries: A Workbook (Nelson and Fernekes2002). The analysis showed that Characteristics of Excellence in

90 COLLEGE & UNDERGRADUATE LIBRARIES

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4



http://www.HaworthPress.com

Higher Education 2002 had corresponding elements in all twelvesections of the ACRL Standards for College Libraries (Nelson andFernekes 2002, 128-29). The information in that chart has been revisedfor the Standards for Libraries in Higher Education and is included inthe Appendix of this article.

MIDDLE STATES COMMISSION

In 2002, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education pub-lished Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: EligibilityRequirements and Standards for Accreditation, which replaced the1994 Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: Standards forAccreditation. These standards apply to universities, colleges, and com-munity colleges whether they are public or private, non-profit or propri-etary institutions within the region served by the commission.

The 1994 edition included a separate section on “Library and Learn-ing Resources: Access and Utilization.” The new standards eliminated aspecific library section, but library resources and services are includedin broad categories within the institutional and educational standards.One specific example was provided by Oswald Ratteray, AssociateDirector for the Commission: “Information literacy, a learning outcome,was shifted to the section that deals with curriculum, rather than beingmarginalized as a purely library concern in 1994” (Ratteray 3/31/2005).

The new standards are less prescriptive in stating institutional andlibrary requirements, using such subjective terminology as “available,accessible, and adequate learning resources,” “professionals appropri-ately prepared,” and “learning resources … adequately supported andstaffed.” There is much less emphasis on quantifiable and arbitrary in-puts and more emphasis on outcomes assessment of student learning.These standards provide new challenges and opportunities for MiddleStates colleges and universities and the libraries that serve them.

This article first provides an introduction to and summary of Charac-teristics of Excellence in Higher Education 2002 through a detailed listof provisions specifically applicable to libraries in higher education.The provisions and importance of Standards for Libraries in HigherEducation, approved by the Association of College and Research Li-braries (ACRL) in 2004, are summarized and examples of implementa-tion are identified. All institutions accredited by a regional accreditationagency or professional groups that expect outcomes assessment will

Debbie Malone and William Neal Nelson 91

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

gain valuable information and suggestions by considering these ACRLstandards.

Since the new Middle States standards are less prescriptive and morediffuse than the previous standards, it is difficult for librarians to deter-mine an appropriate compliance strategy. Use of the newest ACRLstandards for the assessment of an academic library provides the com-prehensive library evaluation required to demonstrate compliance withthe Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education 2002.

PRINCIPLES OF ACCREDITATION

The following is a summary of the major provisions of the revisedMiddle States Standards, which differ in both style and format from the1994 standards.

Three important principles guided the development of this revision:“First, these standards place greater emphasis on institutional assessmentand assessment of student learning. Second, the standards acknowledgethe diversity of educational delivery systems that enable institutions tomeet accreditation standards. And third, in order to achieve greater speci-ficity, the standards are more clearly defined and illustrated, includingexamples of evidence that could substantiate an institution’s achieve-ment of these goals” (Middle States 2002, v).

The Commission realizes that to meet these standards, institutionswill need to redirect some of their research focus by reducing the em-phasis on input measures and placing increased emphasis on the assess-ment and the improvement of teaching and learning.

Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education defines accredita-tion as “the means of self-regulation and peer review adopted by theeducational community.” This process is “intended to strengthen andsustain the quality and integrity of higher education, making it worthyof public confidence and minimizing the scope of external control”(Middle States 2002, iv).

To be granted accreditation, the institution must have a missionwhich clearly defines its purpose. In addition, the institution must have“clearly articulated operational and educational goals that define theactions planned to meet the expectations of the institution’s mission andthe institutional community. Goals are derived from the mission.”Objectives are outcome-based and capable of being evaluated. “Botheducational goals and objectives should be stated in terms of the out-comes they seek to achieve” (Middle States 2002, 2).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

In addition, the institution should demonstrate that it is “so orga-nized, staffed, and supported that it can be expected to continue to ac-complish its mission and goals; and that it assesses both institutionaleffectiveness and student learning outcomes, and uses the results forimprovement” (Middle States 2002, iv).

Initial and continuous Middle States accreditation is based on evi-dence that is presented by the institution in periodical self-study reportsand peer review visits and evaluations approximately every ten years.“In the fifth year after reaccreditation, institutions are expected to pre-pare a periodic review report (PPR) which looks back at the recommen-dations from the last self-study, considers the status of the institution atpresent and projects what is likely to occur in the future” (Ratteray2002, 370).

ACRL STANDARDS FOR LIBRARIES IN HIGHEREDUCATION

The Association of College and Research Libraries, a division ofthe American Library Association, promulgates professional standardsfor academic libraries. Since 1959 several editions of type-of-librarystandards have been approved for university libraries, college libraries,and community and junior college libraries. The 2000 edition of theStandards for College Libraries was notable as the first set of ACRLstandards to incorporate outcomes assessment.

With the 2000 edition of the Standards for College Libraries, ACRLdeparted from the trend of establishing prescriptive standards. Somestandards about quality and quantity were retained from the earlier edi-tion and some necessary input and output measures were included, butthe main emphasis of the revised college standards was to assist librar-ies in establishing individual goals within the context of their own insti-tutional goals.

In 2002, the ACRL Board of Directors appointed a College andResearch Libraries Standards Task Force with representatives fromeach of the three type-of-library sections (University Libraries Section,College Libraries Section, and Community and Junior College Librar-ies Section) to work together on a common set of standards for aca-demic libraries. The task force developed a document, Standards forLibraries in Higher Education, which closely follows the Standards forCollege Libraries. The Task Force held open hearings and solicitedcomments on the draft document, which received final approval by


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

ACRL in June 2004 and superceded the separate standards for universi-ties, colleges, and two-year institutions.

These Higher Education Standards include basic statistical “inputs”used for traditional aspects of assessment, as well as outcomes assess-ment, and provide methods to analyze library outcomes and operations.Additionally, questions are included to provide guidance for the provi-sion of library services. The Standards address twelve different aspectsof academic libraries: Planning, Assessment, Outcomes Assessment,Services, Instruction, Resources, Access, Staff, Facilities, Communi-cation and Cooperation, Administration, and Budget. The Standardsintroduce and describe the use of suggested points of comparison andthe use of outcomes assessment. They provide qualitative measures toassess user satisfaction and service quality as well as quantitative mea-sures (inputs and outputs) for internal trend analysis and comparisonwith peers. A number of academic libraries have successfully appliedthe standards, and several have made all or part of their assessmentpublicly available on the web (ALA, ACRL, CLS, 2005, webpage).

A COMPLIANCE STRATEGY

The non-prescriptive nature of the revised Middle States standardsrequires changes in analysis modes for those attempting to documentcompliance. The standards include some familiar concepts from the1994 edition, but they also present some uncharted waters for thoseseeking accreditation. According to Oswald Ratteray,

The standards are designed to encourage greater collaborationwithin the campus community and to allow flexibility for institu-tional creativity in designing educational delivery systems …Instead of focusing up to two years of the self-study process ongathering and analyzing data on inputs and outputs, librarians andfaculty now are being asked to engage in what will be for manyeither a new or a deeper level of collaboration. (Ratteray 2002,369-70)

The ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education is a useful toolfor thoroughly reviewing the academic library because it provides anationally approved comprehensive standard. This set of standardscan assist librarians in drawing conclusions regarding the adequacy,sufficiency, and appropriateness of library services, collections, and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

facilities. Once the Standards are applied and the data gathered, conclu-sions can be clearly drawn and supported. With this thorough review,bolstered by the supporting data, libraries are in a good position to dem-onstrate to Middle States reviewers that their conclusions are “consis-tent with widely accepted norms within the profession.” A similarstrategy was proposed earlier for the new standards of the Commissionon Colleges, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (Nelson2004).

Outcomes assessment is now almost universally required by regionalaccrediting associations and the more specialized accrediting bodies.By using this comprehensive, national academic library standard, librar-ies have the opportunity to review all aspects of the academic library, notjust those specifically mentioned in Characteristics of Excellence inHigher Education, 2002. Libraries will have the information requiredby all of the groups that accredit a particular institution. The library canconduct its own coherent and ongoing evaluation plan and then refor-mat the resulting data to meet various accreditation requirements.

Use of the Standards for Libraries in Higher Education also facili-tates the comparison of data among peers because all peers using thestandards would be collecting the same basic information. After onelibrary in a group of peers aggregates and analyzes the data, it is thenavailable for all other members of the peer group. Also, the onerous taskof collecting and aggregating the data could be shared among institu-tions by rotating the collection chore among the peer libraries.

Middle States and the other accrediting associations generally takethe position that they will not accept any standards, other than their own,in making a determination about the accreditation of an institution.However, the gathering of information necessary to apply the ACRLStandards and the changes in the type of information sought can pro-vide academic libraries with strong evidence of compliance with thenew standards in Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education.

The best strategy for library compliance with the new Middle StatesCommission standards is to design and implement an assessment planbased on the ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education thenpresent the conclusions and supporting data in a format compatiblewith institutional and Middle States requirements. To assist in such aneffort, the following material is provided: (1) key library elementsfrom the Middle States standards are identified and listed, and (2) achart (Appendix) is included for cross reference between the MiddleStates and the ACRL standards, as well as identification of key conceptsfor library assessment.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

KEY ELEMENTS FOR LIBRARIES IN THE MIDDLESTATES STANDARDS

An analysis of Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Educationidentified the following specific elements of the standards that are di-rectly applicable to libraries in higher education. They are listed accord-ing to the Standard where they appear.

Institutional ContextStandard 1 – Mission, Goals and Objectives

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is character-ized by: clearly defined mission, goals, and objectives that: guidefaculty, administration, staff and governing bodies in making deci-sions related to planning, resource allocation, program and curric-ulum development, and definition of program outcomes; includesupport of scholarly and creative activity, at levels and of the kindsappropriate to the institution’s purposes and character (MiddleStates 2002, 2).

Standard 2 – Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal

The result of an effective planning process is institutional renewal.The appropriate modification of courses, programs and servicesresults from the thorough review of relevant quantitative and qual-itative data drawn from all segments to the institutional commu-nity, and is reflective of the changing needs of that community(Middle States 2002, 5).

Standard 3 – Institutional Resources

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby:…recognition in the comprehensive plan that facilities, such aslearning resources fundamental to all educational and researchprograms and libraries, are adequately supported and staffed toaccomplish the institution’s objectives for student learning, bothon campuses and at a distance; an educational and other equipmentacquisition and replacement process and plan, including provisionfor current and future technology, as appropriate to the educationalprograms and support services, and evidence of implementation(Middle States 2002, 8).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Standard 4 – Leadership and Governance

Relative to this standard an accredited institution is characterizedby: a well-defined system of collegial governance including writ-ten policies outlining governance responsibilities of administra-tion and faculty and readily available to the campus community(Middle States 2002, 13).

Standard 5 – Administration

Relative to this standard an accredited institution is characterizedby: qualified staffing appropriate to the goals, type, size, and com-plexity of the institution (Middle States 2002, 17).

Standard 6 – Integrity

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: sound ethical practices and respect for individuals through itsteaching, scholarship/research, service and administrative practice(Middle States 2002, 19).

Standard 7 – Institutional Assessment

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: use of assessment results to improve and gain efficiencies inadministration services and processes, including activities specificto the institution’s mission (e.g., service, outreach, research) (Mid-dle States 2002, 22).

Educational EffectivenessStandard 10 – Faculty

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: Faculty and other professionals appropriately prepared andqualified for the positions they hold, with roles and responsibilitiesclearly defined, and sufficiently numerous to fulfill those rolesappropriately (Middle States 2002, 29).

Standard 11 – Educational Offerings

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: learning resources, facilities, instructional equipment, libraryservices, and professional library staff adequate to support the insti-tution’s educational programs; collaboration between profession-al library staff and faculty in teaching and fostering information


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

literacy skills relevant to the curriculum; programs that promotestudent use of information and learning resources; provision of com-parable quality of teaching/instruction, academic rigor, and educa-tional effectiveness of its courses and programs, regardless of thelocation or delivery mode (Middle States 2002, 34).

Standard 12 – General Education

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: general education requirements assuring that, upon degreecompletion, students are proficient in oral and written communi-cation, scientific and quantitative reasoning, technological capa-bilities appropriate to the discipline, and information literacy,which includes critical analysis and reasoning (Middle States 2002,38).

Standard 13 – Related Educational ActivitiesBranch Campuses, Additional Locations and Other InstructionalSites

Offerings at branch campuses, additional locations, and other in-structional sites (including study abroad locations and programsoffered at business/corporate sites) that meet standards for qualityof instruction, academic rigor, and educational effectiveness com-parable to those of other institutional offerings (Middle States2002, 44).

Distance or Distributed Learning

Relative to this standard, an accredited institution is characterizedby: available, accessible, and adequate learning resources (such aslibraries or other information resources) appropriate to the offer-ings at a distance (Middle States 2002, 46).

Standard 14 – Assessment of Student Learning

In developing their assessment plans, institutions should begin, ofcourse, with those assessment measures already in place. . . . Insti-tutions should also consider developing new datasets related tolearning outcomes. . . . Assessment is not an event but a processand should be an integral part of the life of the institution. It is theresponsibility of the institution to decide what assessment tasksshould be performed, in what sequence, within what time frame,and for what effect (Middle States 2002, 51).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

PROVISIONS IN THE MIDDLE STATES STANDARDSAFFECTING ACADEMIC LIBRARIES, CATEGORIZED

BY ACRL STANDARDS SECTION

Below, the Middle States accreditation standards provisions affect-ing academic libraries are arranged by section of the ACRL standards towhich they apply. This chart (Appendix) provides a bidirectional cross-reference between the two documents. The authors have also identifiedkey assessment concepts for each of the categories.

REFERENCES

American Library Association (ALA), Association of College and Research LibrariesDivision (ACRL), College Libraries Section (CLS). Web page. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/aboutacrl/acrlsections/collegelibraries/collpubs/Standards.pdf.

Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL). Web page. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/standardslibraries.htm.

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Higher Education.2002. Characteristics of excellence in higher education: Eligibility requirementsand standards for accreditation. Philadelphia: Middle States Commission onHigher Education.

Nelson, William N. 2004. SACS Standards 2004: A compliance strategy for academiclibraries. The Southeastern Librarian 52:12-21.

Nelson, William Neal and Robert W. Fernekes. 2002. Standards and assessment foracademic libraries: A workbook. Chicago: Association of College and ResearchLibraries.

Ratteray, Oswald. 3/31/2005. E-mail to Debbie Malone. Subject: Standards previous toCharacteristics of excellence.

Ratteray, Oswald M.T. 2002. Information literacy in self study and accreditation.Journal of Academic Librarianship 28:368-75.

Received: 05/26/05Revised/Reviewed: 07/08/05

Accepted: 07/11/05


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.ala.org

http://www.ala


APPENDIX. A Chart Providing Bidirectional Cross-Reference Between TwoDocuments

ACRL, Standardsfor Libraries inHigher Ed.(2004)

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools,Commission on Higher Education, Characteristics ofExcellence in Higher Education(January 2002 edition)

Key Concepts

Planning “The institution’s mission clearly defines its purposewithin the context of higher education and explains whomthe institution serves and what it intends to accomplish.The institution’s stated goals and objectives, consistentwith the aspirations and expectations of highereducation, clearly specify how the institution will fulfill itsmission.” Standard 1, p. 1.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: institutional goals and objectives thatare consistent with mission.” Standard 1, “FundamentalElements,” p. 3

These two statementsindicate that the libraryshould have a missionstatement that reflectsthe mission statement ofthe institution, and thatlibrary goals andobjectives should becongruent with those ofthe parent body.

Assessment “The mission, goals, and objectives are developed andrecognized by the institution with its members and itsgoverning body and are utilized to develop and shape itsprograms and practices and to evaluate itseffectiveness.” Standard 1, p. 1.

“An institution conducts ongoing planning and resourceallocation based on its mission and uses the results of itsassessment activities for institutional renewal.”Standard 2, p. 4.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: periodic assessment of theeffectiveness of planning, resource allocation, andinstitutional renewal processes.”Standard 2, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 6.

“The institution has developed and implemented anassessment plan and process that evaluates its overalleffectiveness in: achieving its mission and goals;implementing planning, resource allocation, andinstitutional renewal processes; using institutionalresources efficiently; providing leadership andgovernance; providing administrative structures andservices; demonstrating institutional integrity; andassuring that institutional processes and resourcessupport appropriate learning and other outcomes for itsstudents and graduates.” Standard 7, p. 21.

“Assessment is not an event but a process and should bean integral part of the life of the institution. It is theresponsibility of the institution to decide what assessmenttasks should be performed, in what sequence, withinwhat time frame, and for what effect.”Standard 14, “Context,” p. 51.

The library should have arole in institutionalstrategic planningprocesses; it is alsoresponsible forassessment of its ownadministrative structures,programs, and resourceallocation. “All categoriesof library users should beinvolved in theassessment as well as asampling of non-users.”(ACRL) The results ofthis assessment shouldbe used to demonstrablyimprove library services.

OutcomesAssessment

“Implementation and subsequent evaluation of thesuccess of the strategic plan and resource allocationsupport the development and change necessary toimprove and to maintain institutional quality.“Standard 2, p. 4.

Student learningoutcomes areincreasingly important forall institutions. Librariesmust be able to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4




Key Concepts

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: objectives for improvement that areclearly stated, reflect conclusions drawn from assessmentresults, and are linked to mission and goal achievement,both institution-wide and for individual units.”Standard 2, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 6.

“In the context of the institution’s mission, the effectiveand efficient uses of the institution’s resources areanalyzed as part of ongoing outcomes assessment.”Standard 3, p. 7.

“Assessment of student learning demonstrates that theinstitution’s students have knowledge, skills, andcompetencies consistent with institutional goals and thatstudents at graduation have achieved appropriate highereducation goals.” Standard 14, p. 50.

“Finally, and most significantly, a commitment toassessment of student learning requires a parallelcommitment to ensuring its use. Assessment information,derived in a manner appropriate to the institution and tothe desired academic outcomes, should be available tothose who develop and carry out strategies that willimprove teaching and learning.”Standard 14, “Context,” p. 51.

document theircontributions to theselearning goals.“Outcomesassessment…identifiesperformance measures,such as proficiencies,that indicate how well thelibrary is doing what ithas stated it wishes todo…What quantitativeand qualitative data doesthe library collect aboutits performance? Howdoes it take into accountspecial needs? “(ACRL)

Services “The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, andother resources necessary to achieve an institution’smission and goals are available and accessible.”Standard 3, p. 7.

“The availability and accessibility of adequate learningresources, such as library services and the support ofprofessional staff qualified by education, training andexperience, are essential to an institution of highereducation. The skills and knowledge of suchprofessionals are important not only in their support ofinformation literacy, but also in the development andimplementation of other relevant academic activities.Academic quality, student learning, teachingperformance, and institutional effectiveness areenhanced by programs that assist students, faculty andinstructional staff to use information resources in avariety of media and formats, appropriate to theinstitution, and to understand how to apply theinformation acquired in their work effectively andethically.” Standard 11, “Context.” p. 33.

Standard quantitativemeasures of libraryservices still have a roleto play in describingadequate libraryservices. However,qualitative evaluations ofthe degree to whichlibrary services supportthe academic program ofthe institution areincreasingly important.

Instruction “The institution identifies student learning goals andobjectives, including knowledge and skills, for itseducational offerings.” Standard 11, p. 31.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: program goals that are stated in termsof student learning outcomes.” Standard 11,“Fundamental Elements,” p. 34.

Collaboration with facultyis essential to imbedinformation literacycompetency skillsthroughout thecurriculum with “specialattention given toinformation evaluation,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4


APPENDIX (continued)



Key Concepts

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: collaboration between professionallibrary staff and faculty in teaching and fosteringinformation literacy skills relevant to the curriculum.”Standard 11, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 34.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: programs that promote student use ofinformation and learning resources.” Standard 11,“Fundamental Elements,” p. 34.

“The institution’s curricula are designed so that studentsacquire and demonstrate college-level proficiency ingeneral education and essential skills, including oraland written communication, scientific and quantitativereasoning, critical analysis and reasoning, technologicalcompetency, and information literacy.”Standard 12, p. 37.

critical thinking,intellectual property,copyright andplagiarism.” (ACRL)Librarians shouldparticipate in curriculumplanning as well asinformation literacyinstruction and outcomesassessment.

Resources “The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, andother resources necessary to achieve an institution’smission and goals are available and accessible. In thecontext of the institution’s mission, the effective andefficient uses of the Institution’s resources are analyzedas part of ongoing outcomes assessment.”Standard 3, p. 7.

“An institution conducts ongoing planning and resourceallocation based on its mission and uses the results of itsassessment activities for institutional renewal.”Standard 2, p. 4.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: strategies to measure and assess thelevel of, and efficient utilization of, institutional resourcesrequired to support the institution’s mission and goals.”Standard 3, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 8.

“The availability and accessibility of adequate learningresources, such as library services and the support ofprofessional staff qualified by education, training andexperience, are essential to an institution of highereducation.” Standard 11, “Context.” p. 33.

“Programs delivered through distance learningmodalities—whether by the internet, television,video-conferencing, or other means—should meetacademic and learning support standards, appropriate tothe type of delivery, comparable to those offered in moretraditional formats within higher education.” Suchprograms are characterized by: “available, accessible,and adequate learning resources (such as libraries orother information resources) appropriate to the offeringsat a distance.” Standard 13, “Distance or DistributedLrng.—Fundamental Elements,” p.46

Librarians need todocument how “print,media, and electronicresources reflect campuscurricular and researchneeds.” (ACRL) Librarycollections, resources,and online databasesmust be evaluated bothquantitatively andqualitatively.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4




Key Concepts

Access “The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, andother resources necessary to achieve an institution’smission and goals are available and accessible.”Standard 3, p. 7.

Distance learning programs are characterized by:“available, accessible, and adequate learning resources(such as libraries or other information resources)appropriate to the offerings at a distance.”Standard 13, “Distance or DistributedLearning–Fundamental Elements,” p. 46.

Librarians must “providemaximum intellectual andphysical accessibility tothe library and itscollections… Distancelearning programs shouldbe supported byequivalent means suchas remote electronicaccess to collections, theprovision of reliablenetwork connections and…delivery of materials toremote users.” (ACRL)

Staff “Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: recognition in the comprehensive[master] plan that facilities, such as learning resourcesfundamental to all educational and research programsand libraries, are adequately supported and staffed toaccomplish the institution’s objectives for studentlearning, both on campuses and at a distance.”Standard 3, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 8.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: a well-defined system of collegialgovernance including written policies outlininggovernance responsibilities of administration and facultyand readily available to the campus community.”Standard 4, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 13.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: qualified staffing appropriate to thegoals, type, size, and complexity of the institution.”Standard 5, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 17.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: qualified professionals to superviseand provide the student support services and programs.”Standard 9, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 27.

“The library staff shouldbe sufficient in size andquality to meet theprogrammatic andservice needs of itsprimary users…Libraryprofessionals should beresponsible for andparticipate inprofessional activities.”(ACRL)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4




Key Concepts

“The institution’s instructional, research, and serviceprograms are devised, developed, monitored,and supported by qualified professionals.”Standard 10, p. 28.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: faculty and other professionalsappropriately prepared and qualified for the positionsthey hold, with roles and responsibilities clearly defined,and sufficiently numerous to fulfill those rolesappropriately.” Standard 10, “FundamentalElements,” p. 29.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: published and implemented standardsand procedures for all faculty and other professionals, foractions such as appointment, promotion, tenure,grievance, discipline and dismissal, based on principlesof fairness with due regard for the rights of all persons.”Standard 10, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 29.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: learning resources, facilities,instructional equipment, library services, and professionallibrary staff adequate to support the institution’seducational programs.” Standard 11, “FundamentalElements,” p. 34.

Distance learning programs are characterized by:“adequate technical and physical plant facilities, includingappropriate staffing and technical assistance, to supportelectronic offerings.” Standard 13, “Distance orDistributed Learning – Fundamental Elements,” p. 46.

Facilities “The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, andother resources necessary to achieve an institution’smission and goals are available and accessible.”Standard 3, p. 7.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: recognition in the comprehensive[master] plan that facilities, such as learning resourcesfundamental to all educational and research programsand libraries, are adequately supported and staffed toaccomplish the institution’s objectives for studentlearning, both on campuses and at a distance.”Standard 3, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 8.

Distance learning programs are characterized by:“adequate technical and physical plant facilities, includingappropriate staffing and technical assistance, to supportelectronic offerings.” Standard 13, “Distance orDistributed Learning – Fundamental Elements,” p. 46.

Libraries need to provideadequate physicalfacilities on theircampuses, and theymust insist that distancelearning programs have“appropriate staffing andtechnical assistance tosupport electronicofferings.” (ACRL)

APPENDIX (continued)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

8:44

07

Oct

ober

201

4




Key Concepts

Communication& Cooperation

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: planning and improvement processesthat are clearly communicated, provide for constituentparticipation, and incorporate the use of assessmentresults.” Standard 2, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 6.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: collaboration between professionallibrary staff and faculty in teaching and fosteringinformation literacy skills relevant to the curriculum.”Standard 11, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 34

To effectively meetinstruction andassessment goals,librarians and facultymembers must establishsuccessful collaborativerelationships to fosterinformation literacy skillsthroughout thecurriculum.

Administration “The institution’s administrative structure and servicesfacilitate learning and research/scholarship, foster qualityimprovement, and support the institution’s organizationand governance.” Standard 5, p. 16.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: administrative leaders with appropriateskills, degrees and training to carry out theirresponsibilities and functions.”Standard 5, “Fundamental Elements,” p. 17.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: use of assessment results to improveand gain efficiencies in administrative services andprocesses, including activities specific to the institution’smission (e.g., service, outreach, research).” Standard 7,“Fundamental Elements,” p. 22.

Library administratorsneed to have effectiveand collaborativerelationships with thechief academic orinstructional officer towhom they report.Communication betweenthe library andinstitutionaladministration isessential to securesupport for library goalsand to ensure that thesegoals reflect institutionalpriorities.

Budget “The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, andother resources necessary to achieve an institution’smission and goals are available and accessible.”Standard 3, p. 7.

“Relative to this standard, an accredited institution ischaracterized by: a budget process aligned with theinstitution’s mission, goals, and strategic plan thatprovides for an annual budget and multi-year budgetprojections for at least three-years, both institution-wideand among departments; utilizes planning andassessment documents; and addresses resourceacquisition and allocation for the institution and anysubsidiary, affiliated, or contracted educationalorganizations as well as for institutional systems asappropriate…” Standard 3, “FundamentalElements,” p. 8.

Library budgets mustsupport distanceeducation and extendedcampus programs at alevel similar to that of themain campus.D

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Con

nect

icut

] at

08:

44 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014