|
Accreditation
Committee's order of business
At the opening of the Accreditation Committee meeting, the chair
of the committee introduces the members, staff, observers, and guests.
The chair reminds those in attendance of the guidelines for the
meeting and reviews pertinent information, including the availability
of materials and the schedule. The consideration of each Brief conforms
to the following format:
1. Presentation of the case. One
member of the committee, selected beforehand by the chair, gives
an overview of the panel’s recommendations and the evidence
that the TEAC staff complied with TEAC’s policies and regulations.
2. Certification of the process.
Certification that TEAC has followed its procedures in the case
before the committee is determined by a majority vote of the committee.
The committee examines the documentation cited by the TEAC staff
and certifies that the TEAC’s procedures, policies, regulations
were followed. In cases where the committee finds that the staff’s
failure to satisfactorily comply with the procedures was of some
consequence, it orders remedies for the errors made by the staff.
3. Acceptance of the panel’s recommendations.
Once the committee certifies that TEAC has followed its process,
or determines that the process was not unduly compromised, the committee
examines each finding and recommendation the panel has made, as
well as any third-party comments and any rejoinder the program may
have made.
Inquiry Brief Proposal
In the case of an Inquiry Brief Proposal, the committee
scrutinizes the panel’s conclusions with regard to (1) the
rationale required for Quality
Principle II; (2) the program’s internal audit
of its quality control system required for Quality
Principle III; and (3) the evidence of for TEAC’s
standard of capacity for quality. In other words, the committee
must examine the panel’s conclusions about the following
elements of the TEAC system: 2.1,
3.2, and
4.0.
In most cases, the panel, based on its evaluation
of the entire record, finds that the Inquiry Brief Proposal
supports the program’s overall claim that it can produce
an accept-able Inquiry Brief within five years if it
follows the plan presented in the Inquiry Brief Proposal.
The committee’s task, however, is to see if there is credible
evidence to show that the program faculty will not succeed. If
there is credible evidence, the committee would not award preaccreditation
or new program accreditation. If, on the other hand, there is
no counter evidence of consequence, the committee accepts the
panel’s recommendation for new program accreditation or
preaccreditation.
If the panel had not recommended new program
or preaccreditation status, then the committee would seek evidence
in the record that the program can produce an acceptable Inquiry
Brief within five years if it follows the plan presented
in the Inquiry Brief Proposal. If the committee finds
credible and persuasive evidence that the program can produce
an acceptable Inquiry Brief, the committee rejects the
panel’s recommendation to deny accreditation and awards
the appropriate accreditation status in its place.
Inquiry Brief
In the case of an Inquiry Brief, where the recommendation
typically is for initial or continuing accreditation, the committee
similarly scrutinizes the panel’s conclusions, including
any stipulations and weaknesses the panel has formulated with
regard to each of the three quality principles and the standard
of program capacity for quality. The committee examines the record
to see if there is any basis for a different accreditation recommendation
from the one the panel brought forward.
If the evidence is insufficient to support a
subcomponent of the TEAC system, the panel cites a weakness. If
the evidence is insufficient to support a component of the TEAC
system, the panel cites a stipulation. In either case, the committee’s
examination of weaknesses and stipulations entails searching for
supportive evidence in the record that might have been overlooked
or misinterpreted by the panel. If it fails to find sufficient
supportive evidence, the committee accepts the weaknesses and
stipulations cited by the panel.
5. Committee’s decisions, minutes,
and report. After the committee has made each of its accreditation
decisions, by majority vote, it discusses the contents of the draft
minutes of its meeting. The committee’s minutes in the instance
where it accepts the panel’s recommendations can be brief
and simply state the outcomes of the committee’s deliberations.
In the cases where the committee rejects any of
the panel’s recommendations, including those about stipulations
and weaknesses, and makes a new accreditation decision, the committee
must fully justify its findings and new decision. This will require
a separate report to the program faculty and to the TEAC staff.
The committee’s minutes also present its findings, its decision
on the certification of TEAC’s procedures, and any remedies
it orders. The minutes may also present recommendations to the staff
and the full board of directors about changes in TEAC’s policies,
regulations, and procedures.
6. Debriefing. At the close of
its meeting, the committee will analyze its own decision-making,
particularly with reference to its individual and collective confidence
in its conclusions and accreditation decision and to procedural
modifications it would like to implement at its next meeting.
Go to next step: decision process
Return to Accreditation Committee
and accreditation decision
|
