Rutgers University is taking the opportunity offered by the decennial accreditation process of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools to review its roadmap for excellence in greater education.

The reaccreditation process also allows Rutgers administrators and faculty to join a national discussion regarding assessment and accountability for institutions of higher education, a dialogue spurred by the 2006 report of the commission appointed by U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. The report called for greater transparency about cost, price, and student learning outcomes at colleges and universities.

The steering committee of the Middle States reaccreditation invites members of the Rutgers commuinity to attend forums in Camden, Newark, and New Brunswick. Comments and questions about the self-study report may be emailed to the Steering Committee.

Camden
Friday, November 2, 2007
10 a.m. to noon
Fine Arts Building, Room 110

Newark
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
2:30 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Bove Auditorium, Englehart Hall

New Brunswick
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Scholarly Communication Center, 4th Floor
Alexander Library, College Avenue Campus

“This is coming at a time when there is an enormous amount of substantive but also political discussion nationwide about higher education and in particular, setting learning goals,” said Bob Goodman, executive dean of the School of Biological and Environmental Sciences. Goodman is chair of the steering and executive committees overseeing the Middle States reaccreditation process.

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education reviews college and universities in accordance with 14 standards examining institutional characteristics – such as resources, planning, governance, and integrity – as well as the educational effectiveness of the institution, using categories like admission, retention, faculty, and learning assessments to gauge success.

The Middle States reaccreditation process is voluntary, but institutions without accreditation are not eligible for federal funding, including grants and student financial aid. At a major public research university such as Rutgers, a successful accreditation process is imperative.

Following an October 29 visit by a group from the Middle States Association, three forums will take place on each Rutgers campus – November 2 in Camden, November 6 in Newark, and November 7 in New Brunswick. All members of the university community are invited to participate.

Before attending the forums, members of the community should look at the variety of documents posted on the Middle States Reaccreditation website – the most recent documents are the draft self-study report [PDF] and the preliminary self-study executive summary [PDF].

“The purpose will be to gather comments and reactions and responses and information that will help us revise the self-study,” Goodman said. “What I am saying to people is if what you do at Rutgers or if what you know about Rutgers has something to do with the topics in the self-study, read it for credibility, veracity, and accuracy, and help us improve it.”

“The reaccreditation process is a means for Rutgers to display accountability to members of the university community as well as the higher education community at large,” said Rutgers President Richard L. McCormick. “The stamp of approval indicates that Rutgers is providing a quality education to the tens of thousands of students we serve each year, and ensures that we maintain a level of excellence in the areas of teaching, research, and service.”

The self-study report is largely focused on undergraduate education, a central topic at Rutgers since 2004, when President Richard L. McCormick convened a task force on undergraduate education. One year later, the Board of Governors approved sweeping changes, which are being implemented right now.

“The whole process of transforming undergraduate education was in fact the mother of assessment. Rutgers looked at itself and went through a long, elaborative process,” Goodman said. “We are, in a sense, an institution that is engaged in a large-scale assessment in the fullest sense of the term.”

The committee has working groups committed to studying how Rutgers–Camden works to serve the surrounding community, and how education and academic research at Rutgers–Newark plays a distinctive role in an urban context. On those campuses, the commitment to undergraduate education is being realized in dramatic expansions in student services and housing to serve a growing student body, and new academic programming, such as Honors College and freshman writing seminars, specifically geared toward undergraduate engagement.

Communication Professor Brent D. Ruben, who is also executive director of the Center for Organizational Development and Leadership, said the goals of the reaccreditation process and innovations at Rutgers complement each other.

“The [Middle States reaccreditation] process allows us to think creatively about how best to integrate the concepts of educational goal setting and assessment at all levels,” Ruben said.

The chair of the site visit team from the Middle States Association will be among those visiting Rutgers on October 29. He will meet with President McCormick, members of the Board of Governors and Board of Trustees, a panel of representatives from the working groups at Rutgers focused on the accreditation process, as well as a group of student leaders and the members of the steering committee.

Two “document generalists” will accompany the site visit chair, and review Rutgers’ output to ensure that the university has documented how it meets the 14 standards set by the Middle States Association.

“The primary question for Middle States is: Is Rutgers doing what it says it is doing? The document generalists will be looking at things such as leadership, governance, financial matters, and many other areas,” said Barbara Bender, associate dean for academic support and graduate student services at the Graduate School–New Brunswick.

“The document generalists will spend October 29 literally in one room. They will be reading our materials and studying various links that have been provided. They will also have hundreds of hard copy documents available for review,” Bender said.

Bender has been involved in this process for some time. She helped put the report together during the previous accreditation process at Rutgers 10 years ago, and has also been involved with the Middle States Association, going to other institutions as a member of site visit teams.

“I’ve been doing this for more than 20 years,” Bender said. “I’ve gone to all different types of institutions, private and public. What I get from it is a great deal of insight into how other institutions do what they do.

“Rutgers takes accreditation very seriously and we welcome the opportunity to participate in the process at this very special time in our institutional history,” Bender said. “The self-study process gives us a chance to examine what we’re doing, identify how we can enhance our efforts, and help us plan for the future.”

The Standards at a Glance

Institutional Context

Standard 1: Mission and Goals

The institution’s mission clearly defines its purpose within the context of higher education and indicates who the institution serves and what it intends to accomplish. The institution’s stated goals, consistent with the aspirations and expectations of higher education, clearly specify how the institution will fulfill its mission. The mission and goals are developed and recognized by the institution with the participation of its members and its governing body and are used to develop and shape its programs and practices and to evaluate its effectiveness.

Standard 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

An institution conducts ongoing planning and resource allocation based on its mission and goals, develops objectives to achieve them, and utilizes the results of its assessment activities for institutional renewal. Implementation and subsequent evaluation of the success of the strategic plan and resource allocation support the development and change necessary to improve and to maintain institutional quality.

Standard 3: Institutional Resources

The human, financial, technical, physical facilities, and other resources necessary to achieve an institution’s mission and goals are available and accessible. In the context of the institution’s mission, the effective and efficient uses of the institution’s resources are analyzed as part of ongoing outcomes assessment.

Standard 4: Leadership and Governance

The institution’s system of governance clearly defines the roles of institutional constituencies in policy development and decision-making. The governance structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity and to fulfill its responsibilities of policy and resource development, consistent with the mission of the institution.

Standard 5: Administration

The institution’s administrative structure and services facilitate learning and research/scholarship, foster quality improvement, and support the institution’s organization and governance.

Standard 6: Integrity

In the conduct of its programs and activities involving the public and the constituencies it serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to ethical standards and its own stated policies, providing support for academic and intellectual freedom.

Standard 7: Institutional Assessment

The institution has developed and implemented an assessment process that evaluates its overall effectiveness in achieving its mission and goals and its compliance with accreditation standards.

Educational Effectiveness

Standard 8: Student Admissions and Retention

The institution seeks to admit students whose interests, goals, and abilities are congruent with its mission and seeks to retain them through the pursuit of the students’ educational goals.

Standard 9: Student Support Services

The institution provides student support services reasonably necessary to enable each student to achieve the institution’s goals for students.

Standard 10: Faculty

The institution’s instructional, research, and service programs are devised, developed, monitored, and supported by qualified professionals.

Standard 11: Educational Offerings

The institution’s educational offerings display academic content, rigor, and coherence appropriate to its higher education mission. The institution identifies student learning goals and objectives, including knowledge and skills, for its educational offerings.

Standard 12: General Education

The institution’s curricula are designed so that students acquire and demonstrate college-level proficiency in general education and essential skills, including at least oral and written communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning, critical analysis and reasoning, and technological competency.

Standard 13: Related Educational Activities

The institution’s programs or activities that are characterized by particular content, focus, location, mode of delivery, or sponsorship meet appropriate standards.

Standard 14: Assessment of Student Learning

Assessment of student learning demonstrates that, at graduation, or other appropriate points, the institution’s students have knowledge, skills, and competencies consistent with institutional and appropriate higher education goals.