NEASC FIVE YEAR REPORT FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE JANUARY 2007

NEASC FIVE YEAR REPORT

FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE

JANUARY 2007

FIVE YEAR REPORT GOALS

Review the changes in the standards that will need to be addressed in 2012. Identify ways in which the institution will need to incorporate these changes into its future planning.

Review changes in the college in the past five years.

Summarize the current status of the college with regard to each of the NEASC standards.

Analyze how each of the five cited areas of emphasis in the 2002 report have been addressed.

Identify goals for the future.

NEW EMPHASES IN THE NEASC STANDARDS

INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY1.1 The institution’s mission provides the

basis upon which the institution identifies its priorities, plans for the future and evaluates its endeavors…

2.3 The institution has a demonstrable record of success in implementing the results of its planning.

New Emphasis in The NEASC Standards4.10 Institutions undertaking … substantive

change demonstrate their capacity to undertake such initiatives and to assure that the new academic programming meets the standards of quality of the institution and the Commission’s Standards and policies.

9.3 The institution’s multi-year financial planning is realistic and reflects the capacity of the institution to depend on identified sources of revenue and ensure the advancement of educational quality and services for students.

NEW EMPHASES IN THE NEASC STANDARDSPROGRAM REVIEWS:

4.8 The institution develops, approves, administers, and on a regular cycle reviews its degree programs…

4.9 The evaluation of existing programs includes an external perspective and assessment of their effectiveness.


The CIHE identified several ways to incorporate an external perspective: specialized accreditation; review by state Board; external consultants; benchmarking against peer institutions and analysis of “best practices”.


ROLE OF THE BOARD

3.2 The governing board is the legally constituted body ultimately responsible for the institution’s quality and integrity. The board demonstrates sufficient independence to ensure it can act in the institution’s best interest. The composition of the board includes representation of the public interest and reflects the areas of competence needed to fulfill the responsibilities…

3.3 The board has a clear understanding of the institution’s distinctive mission and purposes…

NEW EMPHASES IN THE NEASC STANDARDS3.4 The board systematically develops and

ensures its own effectiveness…3.5 The board appoints and periodically

reviews the performance of the chief executive officer whose full-time or major responsibility is to the institution…

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS

The 2006 Standards embed institutional effectiveness and assessment of student learning at multiple points throughout the standards. The institutional effectiveness statements are highlighted at the end of each standard.


Standard One: Mission and Purpose

“1.5 The institution periodically evaluates the content and pertinence of its mission and purposes, assessing their usefulness in providing overall direction in planning and resource allocation. The results of this evaluation are used to enhance institutional effectiveness.”


Standard Two: Planning and Evaluation “2.7 The institution determines the

effectiveness of its planning and evaluation activities on an on-going basis. Results of these activities are used to further enhance the institution’s implementation of its purposes and objectives.”


Standard Three: Organization and Governance

3.12 “The effectiveness of the institution’s organizational structure and system of governance is improved through periodic and systematic review.”


Standard Four: The Academic Program 4.51 “The institution’s principal evaluation

focus is the quality, integrity, and effectiveness of its programs. Evaluation endeavors and systematic assessment are demonstrably effective in the improvement of academic offerings and student learning.”

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Five: Faculty 5.22 The institution periodically evaluates

the sufficiency of and support for the faculty and the effectiveness of the faculty in teaching and advising, scholarship, service, and as appropriate to institutional mission, research and creative activity. The results of these evaluations are used to enhance fulfillment of the institution’s mission.”

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Six: Students 6.18 Through a program of regular and

systematic evaluation, the institution assesses the effectiveness in admitting and retaining students and the effectiveness of its student services to advance institutional purposes. Information obtained through this evaluation is used to revise these goals and services and improve their achievements.

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Seven: Library and Other

Information Resources 7.12 “The institution regularly and

systematically evaluates the adequacy, utilization, and impact of its library, information resources and services, and instructional and information technology and uses the findings to improve and increase the effectiveness of these services.”

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Eight: Physical and Technological

Resources

8.6 “The institution’s ongoing evaluation of its physical and technological resources in light of its mission, current needs and plans for the future is a basis of realistic planning and budget allocation.

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Nine: Financial Resources 9.14 “The institution has in place

appropriate internal and external mechanisms to evaluate its fiscal condition and financial management and to maintain its integrity. The institution uses the results of these activities for improvement.”

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Ten: Public Disclosure

10.14 “Through a systematic process of periodic review, the institution ensures that its print and electronic publications are complete, accurate, available, and current. The results of the review are used for improvement

REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS Standard Eleven: Integrity

11.11 “The pursuit of institutional integrity is strengthened through the application of findings from periodic and episodic assessments of the policies and conditions that support the achievement of these aims among members of the institutional community.”

FORMAT OF THE REPORT

Cover page Statement on process used for the

preparation of the report Institutional Overview – changes that have

occurred at the institution Response to areas identified as needing

special emphasis Narrative which addresses how the

institution meets the standards – pay particular attention to the changes and how the institution meets those

FORMAT OF THE REPORT

Goals for the future – identifying the goals that set the stage for the next visit

STEERING COMMITTEE: EXECUTIVE CABINET

Members: Robert V. Antonucci, President

Michael Fiorentino, Jr., Vice President and Provost for Academic Affairs

Sheila Sykes, Vice President for Finance and Administration

Jane Coviello, Associate VP of Human Resources Mark Drozdowski, Executive Director of the Fitchburg State College Foundation Michael Shanley, Executive Assistant to the President

WORKING COMMITTEE ON THE FIVE YEAR REVIEW DRAFT

Michael Fiorentino, Jr. , Vice President and Provost for Academic Affairs

Shirley Wagner, Associate VPAA

Elaine Francis, Dean of Education

Stanley Bucholc, Dean of Student and Academic Life

Cathy Canney, Dean of Graduate and Continuing Education

Pamela McCafferty, Dean of Enrollment Management

Terry Carroll, Director of Planning and Institutional Research

Melissa Demerest, Assistant Director

REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS

Department Chairs ACC ACC Sub-committees, as appropriate Academic Affairs team Executive Cabinet Board of Trustees

TIMELINE FOR THE NEASC FIVE YEAR REVIEW

August 2006: Establish Steering Committee; establish timeline for review

September 2006: Forward the data requests to all relevant offices; review the three year documents and the progress made since that time; create power point presentation on the review and its goals to be shared with a variety of offices; schedule meetings with key offices that have information that is needed for the review; set up website for the review

TIMELINE FOR NEASC FIVE YEAR REVIEW

October 2006: Meetings with key offices and groups on the progress made in special areas and emphasis, the achievements to be emphasized in the overview of the college, and future plans. Meetings within key areas to review the changes in the standards and how these will be addressed for the future.

November 2006: Continuation of meetings on the changes in the standards. Writing and review of key sections by Working Committee on the draft and the Steering Committee

TIMELINE FOR FIVE YEAR REVIEW

December 2006: Submission to the ACC for review and comment; open faculty sessions on Five Year Review

January 15, 2007: Five Year Review is submitted to NEASC

AREAS OF EMPHASIS

1. Engaging in institutional planning that is systematic, broad-based and participatory

2. The continued development of a governance system that supports the accomplishment of the institution’s mission and purpose

3. Continued development of the Leadership College emphasis

4. Using the results of assessment of student learning for improvement

5. Systematically strengthening the systems of academic advising for students

Documents for the NEASC Five Year Review

Strategic plan update Technology update LAS Program Facilities Planning documents Assessment Plans Comprehensive Academic Plan draft Budget documents Enrollment Projections

Documents for the NEASC Five Year Review

Program Review documents