Writing and Reporting Strategies for Preparing Middle States Documents

Let your evidence do the talking:

Susan DeMatteoSophia Howlett, Ph.D.

Kean University

12-3-2015

Presentation Learning Outcomes

1. Write and prepare Middle States documentation using a succinct and analytical writing style.

2. Organize supporting evidence through developing an effective document roadmap.

3. Develop a cross-functional writing team.

4. Articulate strong self-study recommendations for achieving institutional goals.

1. Succinct, Analytical Writing Style

-- Academic vs. Report Writing Style

-- Answer the question

Example 1: Architecture

Substantive ChangeFirst Draft and Final

Version

1. Succinct, Analytical Writing Style

-- Includes essential “need to know” components.

--Supplemental “to learn more” components can be hyper-linked to web-sites.

-- Supporting evidence included as attachments.

Example 2: Distance Learning

Substantive ChangeProposal

Which would you rather read?

2. Organized Supporting Evidence

-- User-friendly “flagging” (document navigation)

-- Avoid “truckloads” of documents in appendices. (Everything but the kitchen sink).

--Attachments require editing as well.

Where to start? (Gathering Evidence)

– Review the standard you are seeking to address.

– What practices are already occurring organically?

– Take inventory of supporting evidence

– Identify gaps in your evidence

Building a Document Roadmap

– Makes reporting manageable

– Breaks down the report into separate components for work distribution

– Links standards to tangible evidence

Roadmap TemplateX. Standard CategoryX.x.x Standard Criterion

Short narrative explaining how standard has (or will be) met. (1-5 sentences)

Evidence Links:– Reference/attach supporting documents that provide

evidence that you have met (or plan to meet) standard.

– (i.e. web links, “See appendix X”, …etc.)

Roadmap “Gaps”• When more information is needed, or• Supporting evidence can’t be obtained,• Create an action item.

Action Items: Responsible Party Timeline

Articulate what needs to be done to continue to address this criterion.

Specify who is responsible for getting it done.

Provide a specific time for completion.

Roadmap Example1. Mission1.3.1 [Each program mission statement] is consistent with that of the institution.

The Institutional and EOF mission statements were reviewed in June, 2015 and were determined by the University Planning Council (???) to be strongly aligned.

Evidence Links:– http://abc-college.edu/about us/institutional-mission.html– http://abc-college.edu/EOF/EOF-mission.html

Action Items: Responsible Party Timeline

1.3.1 Obtain evidence from the June 2015 UPC meeting that missions were reviewed and voting took place.

University Planning Council Chair

June, 2016

Document Roadmap Example

Middle States Standard 7 Document Roadmap

(Kean Standard 7 Roadmap example)

--“2 pairs of eyes are better than one”

-- each contributor has different strengths.

--Each member can have a different role.

-- “All hands on deck”

3. Cross-functional Writing Teams

4. Strong Self-study Recommendations

– address weaknesses.

– are “S.M.A.R.T.”

– require action planning

– have ownership

– tell Middle States,

“We got this!”

4. Strong Self-study Recommendations

– Commit to implementation.

– Limit number of recommendations.

– Focus on core issues

– Prioritize (short, mid, long-term)

Including an Action Plan to Support Self-study Recommendations

– Establishes a central source for coordination

– Provides for distribution of work

– Makes roles and responsibilities explicit to all

– Ensures tasks are accomplished within a given time frame

– Keeps ongoing activities on the radar

Action Plan ExampleAction Items: Responsible Party Timeline

2.3.1 Distribute self-reflection survey to all students who have completed First Year Experience (FYE) program.

Director of Institutional Research

May, 2016

2.3.2. Compile and distribute FYE self-reflection survey results to the FYE Coordinator.

Director of Institutional Research

June, 2016

2.3.5. Use self-reflection survey results to create strategies for improvement.

FYE Coordinator

July, 2017

1.3.1 Review institutional and EOFmission statements every 5 years to ensure continued alignment.

EOF Director June, 2018

So What? Now What?“Closing the Loop” Requires:

Analysis

–Sharing and discussion of results

–Analyzing results

– Identifying areas of strength and weakness

Actions

– Decision-making based on those results

– Creating a strategy for improving student learning and institutional effectiveness

“It is pointless simply ‘to do assessment’; the results of assessment activities should come full circle to have a direct impact on teaching and learning...” (Middle States, 2007, p. 59).

“Closing the Loop” Examples:

Please see pages 64-65 of: Student Learning Assessment:

Options and Resources

(Middle States, 2007)

Figure 14 - Using Assessment Results at the

Institutional Level

References

Middaugh, Michael, F. (2010). Planning and Assessment in Higher Education: Demonstrating Institutional Effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Middle States Commission on Higher Education (2011). Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education: Requirements of Affiliation and Standards for Accreditation. Philadelphia, PA: Middle States Commission on Higher Education.

Opportunity For A New Millennium: EOF Planning Report (1997). New Jersey Commission on Higher Education . Retrieved online.

Student Learning Assessment—Options and Resources. (2nd ed. 2007). Philadelphia: Middle States Commission on Higher Education, pp. 27-53.