UIU’s Academic Quality Improvement Program

(AQIP)

Open Forum 2Categories 2 And 6

The 2009-2010 AQIP Steering Committee (ASC):

• Mr. Don Aungst, CFO • Dr. Dave Chown, CAO • Dr. Scott Figdore, Professor of Science• Dr. DeWayne Frazier, SVP International Programs • Dr. Linda Haines, Assoc VP Academic Extension• Dr. Doug McReynolds, Bissell Prof of English• Dr. Mari Molseed, Professor of Sociology• Dr. Rich Patrick, Dean of Faculty• Ms. Deena Serra, Administrative Assistant

8—Participation in Quality

Checkup Site Visit

9—Reaffirmation of

Accreditation

UIU Accepted into AQIP

4/27/05

1—Strategy Forum

2—Official Declaration of Action Projects

3—Submission of Annual Updates

4—Retirement of Engrafted Action

Projects

5—Declaration of New Action Projects

6—Submission of Systems Portfolio

7—Strategy Forum to Complete

Systems Appraisal

10/2005

12/2005

Annually, September

Annually, when process is fully engrafted

Annually, April

2012-2013

MAY 2010

9/2009

UIU and the AQIP Cycle

Systems Appraisal via AQIP Strategy Forum

Strategy Forum - focused on developing and fine-tuning processes for continuous organizational learning.

• UIU submitted Systems Portfolio to HLC/AQIP• AQIP reviewers provided Systems Appraisal

Feedback Report– Strengths and opportunities for improvement were

identified– AQIP Steering Committee has homework to

complete with your help

Strategy Forum Homework1. Update Organizational Overview • Does the first 10 pages of UIU’s Systems Portfolio still

accurately describe the institution?

2. Prepare “Reflections for Action on Continuous Improvement” • Summarize five truths/lessons/principles/myths on “lessons

learned” since joining AQIP.

3. Complete a Category Improvement Worksheet• Identify the AQIP category that is currently the highest

priority for improvement. (UIU – Category One)

4. Create a handout describing UIU’s quality effort • Provide a summary of institutional involvement and evidence

of same.

Strategy Forum Team

• Mr. Bob Firth – Board Chair• Dr. Alan Walker - President• Mr. Don Aungst - CFO• Dr. Dave Chown - CAO• Dr. Rich Patrick – Dean of Faculty• Dr. Linda Haines – Assoc VP for AE• Dr. DeWayne Frazier – Senior VP IP• Dr. Scott Figdore – Professor of Science• Dr. Mari Molseed - Alternate

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes

Processes2P6. How do you incorporate information on faculty and staff needs in readjusting these objectives or the process that support them?

UIU recognizes the need for a more formal process for incorporating information regarding faculty and staff needs in the readjusting of distinctive objectives and processes to support them.

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes

Results2R1. What measures of accomplishing your major non-instructional objectives and activities do you collect and analyze regularly? 2R2. What are your performance results in accomplishing your other distinctive objectives?

Data collection related to distinctive objectives appears qualitative, incidental, and limited to the Fayette location. A formal procedure to measure and analyze performance related to distinctive objectives will provide objective data of the positive effects on student learning and student success. UIU recognizes the need for a more formal process for incorporating information regarding faculty and staff needs in the readjusting of distinctive objectives and processes to support them.

Category Two: Accomplishing Other Distinct Outcomes

Improvements 2I2. How do your culture and infrastructure help you to select specific processes to improve and to set targets for improved performance results in Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives?

Insufficient evidence is provided of institution-wide or department-level processes for resource planning or measurement and assessment of non-instructional programs. Without clear processes to measure non-instructional objectives, it will remain a challenge to identify targets for improvement.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations

Results6R1. What measures of student, administrative, and organizational support service processes do you collect and analyze regularly?

UIU reports the collection of data for various student, administrative and institutional sectors; however, it is not clear what type of data are being collected nor is it clear how analysis of the data leads to continuous improvements throughout the institution and its multiple locations. With limited data it may be difficult for UIU to accurately allocate resources and improve processes that will better enable the institution to achieve its mission, improve the quality of education and services and respond to future opportunities and challenges at its 18 locations.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations

Results6R2. What are your performance results for student support service processes?

Although UIU reports recent changes in student support services it is not clear that data-driven processes are used to inform these changes. Without a data-driven process such as Plan-Do-Check-Act, it is difficult to determine if UIUs current approaches and associated changes will enhance and improve student support services. Additionally it is not clear that UIU utilizes comparative data among its multiple locations in informing performance results.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional OperationsResults6R3. What are your performance results for administrative support services processes? 6R4. How do your key student, administrative, and organizational support areas use information and results to improve their services?

Performance results associated with administrative support and institutional support are lacking, limited quantitative data has been made available for review. Additionally, it is not clear what data is being used to inform changes to these services as benchmark and comparative data are not presented. Without a data-driven process such as Plan-Do-Check-Act, it is difficult to determine if UIUs current approaches and associated changes will enhance and improve key support processes.

Category Six: Supporting Institutional Operations

Results6R5. How do your results for the performance of your processes for Supporting Organizational Operations compare with the performance results of other higher education organizations and, if appropriate, of organizations outside of higher education?

Although UIU established a benchmark committee in 2007 there is no reportable information at this time. Benchmarking results help provide evidence of an organization’s comparative advantage and assists in the development of goals and objectives designed to address future challenges and opportunities.