Fall 2011 Visit Tools and Requirements

Please review the following list to ascertain which of these tools and requirements apply to your upcoming visit.

1. 2008 Revisions to the Criteria for review and Institutional Review Process

Changes in the CFRs and Institutional Review Process were adopted by the Commission in 2008. All institutions need to address the CFR revisions and new subject matter requirements in their CPR and EER reports. Teams are required to review this material and address it in the team report. In 2009-10, several institutions that submitted reports did not address the new requirements concerning coverage of student success (graduation and retention, etc.) and program review.

2. Standards and Criteria for Review

The CFRs referred to above are part of the Standards of Accreditation, which appear in the WASC Handbook of Accreditation (Section II). “Standards at a Glance” provides a summary of the Standards in table format so that you can easily search for CFRs. “Expectations for Two Reviews” clarifies the distinctions between the CPR and EER visits and explains how they apply to student learning outcomes and assessment.

3. compliance audit checklist

This checklist must be completed for candidacy, initial accreditation and most special visits. If required, the team should complete this document, noting any missing items, and attach it as an appendix to the team report.

4. evaluating program review on eer visits

Instituted in 2009-10, this process is a systematic way for teams to examine program reviews and assessment of student learning during EER visits. The approach integrates a number of WASC’s other forms and rubrics. The assessment-related rubrics cover five areas - Program Review, Portfolios, Capstones, General Education, and Program Learning Outcomes.

5. Educational effectiveness framework

In use for several years, this form has been very helpful for institutions and teams. We have been collecting completed frameworks for a study of educational effectiveness and will continue this study in 2010-11. At the end of the visit, EER teams should note on a copy of the framework document where the institution falls in each category/line. The Assistant Chair will send this annotated document to the assigned WASC vice president. This document is considered part of the Confidential Team Recommendation. Staff analyzes the frameworks submitted after visits to learn more about how institutions are addressing educational effectiveness, what their challenges are, and how WASC might support teams in evaluating educational effectiveness.

6. team report directions and formats

Team should be sure to follow the report template. There are separate formats for CPR, EER and Special visits. We encourage teams, in particular the Assistant Chair, to type directly into the applicable Word document, replacing the instructions in the template with the team’s text. Experienced Assistant Chairs have found that this practice saves time, ensures that the team’s report follows the required organization and headings, and reminds the team about key questions that it should address in each section. Team members are encouraged to begin making preliminary drafts of their sections of the report prior to the visit, and the guidelines for doing this are included in #7 below.

7. preliminary team report narrative

Team members are encouraged to prepare an outline of the team report and start drafting their sections of the report prior to the visits.  Teams have found that this helps them to identify issues more clearly and prepare more effectively. Teams are encouraged to do this pre-visit drafting again this term.  Please see these instructions: