SACS and the QEP: Assessment and the Role of Academic Libraries

Doyle Carter and Sarah Logan

Presented to the Texas Library Association April 14, 2011

SACSCOC Accreditation & the QEP

Principles of Accreditation1. Peer Review2. Institutional Integrity3. Commitment to Quality Enhancement & Continuous

Improvement4. Focus on Student Learning

Accreditation Reaffirms aCommitment to:

1. Comply with the Principle of Integrity (PR), Core Requirements (CR), Comprehensive Standards (CS), and Federal Requirements (FR) and with the policies and procedures of the Commission on Colleges;

2. Enhance the quality of its educational programs;3. Focus on student learning;4. Ensure a “culture of integrity” in all its operations.

Standards

Core Requirement 2.12: The institution has developed an acceptable Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) that includes an institutional process for identifying key issues emerging from institutional assessment and focuses on learning outcomes and/or the environment supporting student learning and accomplishing the mission of the institution.

Comprehensive Standard 3.3.2: The institution has developed a Quality Enhancement Plan that (1) demonstrates institutional capability for the initiation, implementation, and completion of the QEP; (2) includes broad based involvement ‐of institutional constituencies in the development and proposed implementation of the QEP; and (3) identifies goals and a plan to assess their achievement.

Reaffirmation Processes

Quality Enhancement Compliance

Reaffirmation Deliverables @ ASU

Compliance CertificationAugust, 2012

Focused ReportDecember, 2012

5th-Year Interim Report2018

Quality Enhancement PlanJanuary, 2013

Impact Report2018

Overview of ASU’s QEP Process Phase 1: Planning & Topic Selection

Phase 2: Research & Development

Phase 3: Pilot & Finalize

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Institution’sQuality

Enhancement Plan

Institution’sQEP Impact

Report

1. QEP Development

2. QEP Submission

Optimally, one year for each phase

June 2010-May 2011 June 2011-May 2012 June 2012-May 2013

The Quality Enhancement Plan is submitted to SACSCOC six weeks prior to the on-site review. For ASU, the site visit will take place in the spring of 2013.

3. QEP Implementation

4. QEP Evaluation

AY 2013-14 AY 2014-15 AY 2015-16 AY 2016-17 AY 2017-18

The QEP Impact Report evaluates the impact of the QEP on student learning during the five years of implementation. For ASU, this will be submitted in the spring of 2018.

ASU’s QEP DevelopmentGantt Chart

 0. Preplanning

1. Topic Selection

2. Defining SLO's

3. Researching the Selected Topic

4. Identifying Actions to be Implemented

5. Establishing Implementation Timeline

6. Organizing for Success

7. Identifying Resources

8. Assessing the Success of the QEP

9. Preparining the QEP for Submission

10. Preparing the Impact Report

6/1/2010 12/18/2010 7/6/2011 1/22/2012 8/9/2012 2/25/2013 9/13/2013

Finish

Start

Step 1Topic Selection

Goal: Select a topic by May 6, 2011

Major Tasks:1. Engage constituencies/solicit ideas (Aug-Oct)2. Review existing student learning data (Aug-Oct)3. Review literature (Aug-Oct)4. Report findings (Nov)5. Call for QEP topic proposals (Nov)6. Compose and submit proposals (Nov-Mar)7. Review proposals; make recommendation to Leadership Team (April)

*Proposals to be submitted by small teams of faculty, staff, & students; submission guidelines and evaluation criteria will be included in the call for proposals

Campus Engagement Campaign

The QEP must…

• be directly related to institutional needs, that is; directly improve institutional/student performance (accomplishment of mission);

• be directly related to institutional strategic planning efforts;• include detailed student learning outcomes tied directly to institutional needs;• demonstrate a clear relationship between the activities of the QEP and the

improvement of student learning, all tied to established institutional needs;• include detailed budget/personnel data that clearly defined the institution’s

financial/human resource commitment to the success of the QEP;• include a detailed timetable of year-to-year activities, expenditures, and assessments

that clearly indicates the viability of the 5-year plan;• include documentation of broad-based input during development stage;• directly involve all relevant constituencies in the plan’s implementation; • include clearly stated goals that lead to specific measureable outcomes;• ensure that outcomes are assessed through direct measures.

INTRO TO ASSESSMENT: Definition & Process

Definition An official evaluation: has a planned methodology A process of documenting in measurable terms

Process Decide what you want to know. What is the project’s

objective? Decide how to measure progress towards the objective. Implement measure(s) and targets. Analyze results of implementation. Use the results to inform decision making.

INTRO TO ASSESSMENT: Process Process with an example

What is the objective of the project?• Are students using library resources that support QEP objectives?

Decide how to measure progress towards the objective?• Count resources used during a certain time period.

Assign targets and implement the measures• 50% of students will access QEP-related materials at least once.• Assign staff to record usage.

Analyze results of implementation• Count: catalogue/database use, visitors to special displays

Use of results• Do numbers and uses support QEP objectives?

INTRO TO ASSESSMENT: ProcessThe “YES” Loop

If YES re-define objective and/or targets

• In a semester, 75% of students will access QEP-related materials at least twice.

• In a semester, 50% of students will make better use of QEP-related materials as measured by increased scores on specific parts of written work involving QEP topic (this one takes faculty involvement).

or move on to assessment of other projects

INTRO TO ASSESSMENT: ProcessThe “NO” Loop

If NO, how do we correct the situation? Implement recommendations from Use of Results

Advertise QEP materials in different places/publications Train staff to mention QEP-related materials to students Tweak displays/presentations

Start assessment cycle again The question could change to, “Are more students using

library resources that support QEP objectives now?”• Goal: increase one-time access 20% from baseline in a semester

ABOUT ASSESSMENT: TYPES Direct

Student learning: assess learning with a test of learning Satisfaction with library’s support of QEP: survey people

regarding their satisfaction with the library’s support Indirect

Student learning: assess students’ perceptions of the amount they’ve learned with a survey

Impact of library’s efforts in support of QEP: survey library users about their satisfaction with the library’s QEP materials

ABOUT ASSESSMENT: USES

Measure knowledge and ability Improve current services Verify improvement from past to present Plan future services or directions Inform and/or change perceptions of your

department and its services Discover particular strengths and weaknesses

ABOUT ASSESSMENT: CYCLE Baseline

Often forgotten: everyone just wants to start the project Vital: if you do NOT measure at baseline, you cannot

measure actual strengths, weaknesses or improvement Ex: 50% of our students use the library to research QEP

topics. So??? How many used it the year before the QEP started for other research? How many used it to research QEP topics before they were called QEP?

Continuing Measure on an appropriate cycle: monthly, biennially, etc. Usage depends on peak times; satisfaction may or may not

ABOUT ASSESSMENT: TYPES OF COMPARISONS Longitudinal

Compare over time Baseline 1 year later 2 years later

Benchmark Compare yourself to peers and “stretch” peers You can assess longitudinally with or w/out a benchmark

Normed vs. criterion Normed means each is compared to others Criterion means all are compared to a standard FYI: all the above can be used in various combinations

LIBRARIANS

Keep things Archives are great places to find resources; ordinary

people are often unaware of what is available E-materials: librarians stay up to date with what they are,

how they work, how they may have changed. This is extremely helpful for digital immigrants.

Organization: librarians are organized: having everything is of no help unless one can find the particular piece s/he wants

LIBRARIANS Know things

Why this is important• researchers sometimes do not ask questions well: librarians can

help define the questions• deciding what one wants to know and having materials available

may not be compatible: librarians can suggest solutions Librarians keep up to date

• Buzz words, processes, and databases change• Helping researchers update their mental files is important

Where/how to find resources• Librarians know the connections between various resources.• Librarians know where related resources can be found.

LIBRARIANS

Do things Example: for a QEP about quantitative problem solving

• Library may support: help people find appropriate resources• Library may have direct involvement: present the resources

Make presentations • About resources available• About history of mathematics

Set up displays• Pamphlets describing resources• Real-world applications of quantitative problem solving

CONTACT INFORMATION

Dr. Doyle CarterDirector, Quality Enhancement PlanAngelo State UniversityASU Station #11017San Angelo, TX 76909-1017

325-486-6333doyle.carter@angelo.eduwww.angelo.edu/qep

Dr. Sarah LoganAssistant VP, InstitutionalResearch & EffectivenessAngelo State UniversityASU Station #10920San Angelo, TX 76909-0920

325-942-2259sarah.logan@angelo.eduwww.angelo.edu/

pulications/institutional_research