SACSCOC guidance on 3.1.b is ambiguous.
It does not matter how your supporting documents are organized, just make sure they are.
When we are starting work with a new client on a large project, such as a 5th year report or a reaffirmation, we always ask about a style guide. This is important for a large document with multiple authors. The style guide controls how your institution’s name shows up in print (and how it isContinue reading “Do you have style?”
What should the class of 2025 be doing right now?
The SACSCOC Board approved the Direct Assessment Competency-Based Educational Programs Policy Statement in 2013. I’m ashamed to admit that I was in a position to collaborate with faculty to develop such a program for more than six years (before beginning this consulting adventure) and I never did. The possibilities, particularly in the workforce area, areContinue reading “Why isn’t everybody building competency-based programs?”
“It was the single best professional development experience ever!”
This is the sixth in a series focused on SACSOC interpretations of The Principles of Accreditation. There are a few standards where institutions are permitted to provide a sample of documentation needed to make a case for compliance. We are talking about 7.3 Administrative Effectiveness, 8.2.a Student Outcomes: educational programs, and 8.2.c Student outcomes: academicContinue reading “To Sample or not to Sample, That is the Question…”
This is the fifth in a series focused on SACSCOC interpretations of The Principles of Accreditation 13.8 Institutional environmentUnlike some of the other standards that are accompanied by interpretations, 13.8 does not represent an accreditation challenge for most institutions. Additionally, the 2020 interpretation of the standard, which can be found here, is included in theContinue reading “A Healthy, Safe, and Secure Environment”
This is the third in a series focused on SACSCOC interpretations of the Principles of Accreditation. More than 90% of institutions are found non-compliant with this standard after the off-site review, more than 20% after the on-site review, and it remains a problem for about 5% of institutions after review by the SACSCOC Board. TheContinue reading “Standard 6.2.a Faculty Credentials”
This is one of the few standards where SACSCOC provides a numerical target and lists specific types of courses to help you make your case for compliance.