Smarter Quality Assurance in Higher Education: Key Questions for Institutional Success

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Vital QAS Questions in Higher Education

Quality assurance in higher education is no longer just about meeting accreditation standards—it’s about building smarter systems that drive institutional and programmatic success. Whether you’re preparing for reaffirmation or refining internal processes, a well-functioning Quality Assurance System (QAS) can transform data into decisions and decisions into impact.

In today’s dynamic higher education landscape, accreditation is more than a compliance exercise—it’s a catalyst for continuous improvement. Whether your institution is accredited by accreditors such as the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), the Accreditation for Biblical Higher Education (ABHE), the Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC), the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP), or the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), the common denominator is the expectation of a well-developed, functioning Quality Assurance System (QAS).

A robust QAS isn’t just a repository of data—it’s a living system that supports institutional and programmatic effectiveness through data-informed decision making. When operating as it should, a QAS can answer vital questions that drive strategic planning, academic quality, and student success.

What Should Your QAS Be Able to Answer?

Here are some of the most critical questions a well-functioning QAS should be equipped to answer:

Quality Assurance System questions institutions should answer

Quality Assurance System questions institutions should answer

These questions aren’t just theoretical—they’re practical prompts that should guide your institution’s self-study, annual reporting, and strategic planning. Accrediting bodies increasingly expect institutions to demonstrate not only that they collect data, but that they use it to improve outcomes and close the loop.

Why Institutions Benefit from Expert Support

Developing and sustaining a QAS that can answer these questions isn’t easy. It requires cross-functional collaboration, clear governance, and a culture of evidence. That’s where an experienced consultant can make a difference.

Ways a Skilled Consultant Can Help

 

Whether you’re launching a new program, preparing for reaffirmation, or simply strengthening your internal processes, expert guidance can accelerate your progress and ensure your QAS is not just compliant—but transformative.

Final Thoughts

Quality assurance isn’t a checkbox—it’s a mindset. When your QAS is built to answer the right questions, it becomes a strategic asset that drives excellence across your institution. As accrediting bodies evolve and expectations rise, now is the time to invest in systems that support meaningful, measurable improvement.

If your institution is ready to take its QAS to the next level, consider partnering with a consultant who understands the nuances of accreditation and the realities of institutional life. The right support can turn your data into decisions—and your decisions into impact.

###

About the Author: An experienced college administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit: Microsoft Co-Pilot

 

Using Data to Inform Decision-Making in Higher Education

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
higher education faculty sitting around a conference table discussing aggregated and disaggregated data

In the context of higher education quality assurance, sound academic decision-making cannot rely on instinct or personal preferences—it must be based on evidence. That evidence often comes in the form of key metrics, specifically key assessment data. For institutions to drive continuous improvement confidently, faculty and administrators must both (1) understand what the data reveal about current practices, and (2) use that understanding to guide future strategic planning.

To accomplish this, institutions need high-quality metrics and the ability to view them from both macro and micro perspectives. Aggregated data offer a big-picture view of student performance, while disaggregated data reveal the finer details needed to understand patterns and areas for improvement.

 

Aggregated Data: The Big Picture

Aggregated data are summary-level data that give a broad overview of institutional performance. These include statistics such as overall pass rates on exams, enrollment trends, retention, and graduation rates. They are especially useful for public reporting—such as IPEDS submissions or presentations to external stakeholders like advisory boards and community groups.

This type of data helps institutions “tell their story” at a high level and demonstrate overall effectiveness. However, aggregated data alone often mask important variations within student populations. To make meaningful programmatic improvements, institutions must go deeper—by breaking these data sets into smaller, more specific subsets through disaggregation.

 

Disaggregated Data: The Details That Drive Program Improvement

Many accrediting bodies such as HLC, CAEP, AAQEP, TRACS, and others require institutions to report both aggregated and disaggregated data across at least three assessment cycles. Common disaggregation parameters include program, cohort, gender, and race/ethnicity. While this is feasible at large institutions with diverse enrollments, it poses a challenge for smaller colleges or institutions with relatively homogenous student bodies. In those cases, disaggregation by gender or race may not be statistically meaningful or helpful for decision-making.

Depending on the assessment and institutional context, alternative disaggregation strategies can provide valuable insights. For instance, disaggregating by cohort is common—typically based on academic years (e.g., September 1–August 31). In licensure-based programs like teacher education or nursing, disaggregating by specialty area or licensure pathway is also standard practice.

Beyond that, institutions can disaggregate data in the following ways:

  • By entry status: First-time freshmen vs. transfer students
  • By admission type: Fully admitted vs. conditionally admitted students
  • By prior degree: Post-baccalaureate students vs. those without a degree
  • By course modality: Face-to-face vs. online learners
  • By instructor: If a course or field experience is taught by multiple faculty
  • By academic preparedness: Based on incoming GPA or standardized test scores
  • By assessment attempt: First attempt vs. multiple attempts on key assessments or licensure exams
  • By support service utilization: Students who were referred to academic support services vs. those who were not (similar to analyzing at-risk vs. non-at-risk student groups)

These strategies allow program leaders and faculty to gain a more nuanced understanding of how different groups of students are performing—and why.

 

Conclusion

Aggregated data are essential for summarizing institutional performance and sharing high-level outcomes. But disaggregated data offer the granular insights needed to identify strengths, pinpoint challenges, and support targeted interventions. In today’s accountability-focused educational landscape, combining both views enables colleges and universities to make truly data-informed decisions that lead to meaningful, strategic improvements at both the program and institutional levels.

###

Need to know more about this topic? Need a consultant to help guide your institution or program through an upcoming accreditation site visit? Reach out:

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Accreditation Stress: It’s Real.

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Accreditation Stress

We can all agree: Accreditation is something all higher education officials acknowledge is necessary, but the accreditation stress that goes along with it is something they’d love to do without.

Each accrediting body has its own standards and quality indicators. They have their own policies and procedures which can vary widely. However, one thing that’s common across every accrediting body a site visit, where a review team spends a few days on campus (or virtually) conducting interviews, verifying information, and making recommendations regarding how well the institution measures up to standards.

Regardless of the accrediting body, the site visit is both expensive and exhausting. Regulatory reviews are also extremely high stakes: If things don’t go well, the entire institution suffers. In worst case scenarios, accreditation can be lost, and students can lose their ability to receive financial aid. That can lead to an institution shutting its doors.

With very few exceptions, faculty, staff, and administrators shout for joy when they see a site review team leave campus and head for the airport. Or, when the reviews are virtual, they all breathe a collective sigh of relief when hitting that, “Exit Meeting” button.

Accreditation Stress is Real.

In many instances, staff involved in the accreditation process focus so much on preparing for the site visit they aren’t ready for the emotional or physical toll that it can take on them. Moreover, the stress usually doesn’t end when the site review team leaves. My experience in accreditation over the past 15 years has confirmed there’s a need for this kind of information, and yet it’s a topic I’ve never seen addressed at conferences or in professional literature.

Accreditation-related stress and anxiety are real. You might be able to function, and you may be able to hide it from others. But, how do you know if it’s starting to get the best of you? And what can you do about it?

Red Flag Alert: Some Signs the Stress is Negatively Impacting Your Life

You’re surviving, but you’re not thriving. You may be making it through each day, but the quality of your life is suffering. You’re not enjoying the things that used to make you happy. You feel guilty about taking the time to watch a sunset or to read a book. Every waking moment is spent thinking about the site visit.

Those lights in your brain just won’t shut off. You can’t sleep, even though you feel exhausted. You’re worn out physically and mentally, but you can’t allow yourself to take even a few hours off to rest.

You’re numb inside. You have no appetite and aren’t eating. You’ve even managed to shut down your emotions. It’s like you’ve gone on auto-pilot and feel like a robot.

You feel empty, like there’s a gaping hole inside. But even though the emptiness isn’t from hunger you binge eat everything in sight. And then you still look around for more because you still have that huge gaping hole that just can’t seem to be filled.

You become obsessed with every detail, no matter how minute it may seem. It’s those little foxes that spoil the vine. You’re determined that you’re going to make sure NOTHING is overlooked.  

You come to believe that you are ultimately responsible for the success of the site review. If you’re honest with yourself, you don’t think others are as committed to success as you are. The little voice inside you says, “If you want something done right, you’ve got to do it yourself!”

You start to resent others who don’t seem as stressed out as you are. While you hate feeling like you have the weight of the world on your shoulders, you refuse to delegate responsibility to others and then you get mad when you hear that they went to a movie or a concert over the weekend.

Drink the Stress Away: You may hear yourself saying, “I just need to take the edge off” or “I just need to relax for a while.” Having one glass of Chardonnay is one thing but knocking back five tequila shots in 30 minutes is another.

Ups and Downs: You may self-medicate by taking a pill or two to help you sleep because even though you’re exhausted, you’re wired due to all the stress.

Caffeine overload: You may guzzle coffee, soda, or Red Bull throughout the day (or night) because, “I’ve got to keep going for just a little while longer.”

Shop ‘til Your Fingers Drop: On a whim you may go on a shopping spree and spend a ton of money on things you probably didn’t really need. Not at a brick and mortar store or mall—that would be far too self-indulgent. Instead, you likely visited Zappos or Amazon, where you could remain close to your computer and be right there to respond to an urgent email should one land in your Inbox.

Keep Setting the Bar Higher: You set impossible standards for yourself to meet and then criticize yourself endlessly when you don’t meet them. It’s like you’re obsessed with proving something to others—and to yourself. Except that you’re never satisfied with your performance, even when you do things well.

Slay the Dragon: You plan things down to each minute detail, leaving no stone unturned. You review things in your mind, over and over again. Sometimes you obsess about forgetting something. You’re determined to emerge victorious, regardless of the personal cost.

Accreditation Stress: The Gift that Keeps on Giving

Think the stress of getting ready for a site visit only affects you? Think again. If you have close friends, a life partner, or children, they are affected as well. It’s possible that your furry buddies at home can even detect your anxiety. You’ll know if your stress is out of balance if you hear a loved one say, “I miss you!” “I HATE your job!” or “Will this ever end?”

 

Moving from Surviving to Thriving: How to Manage Your Stress in a Healthy Way

Even Superman struggled at times with Kryptonite. However, he found ways to adapt and overcome those challenges, and so can you. While an accreditation site visit always leads to a certain level of stress, there are things you can do to minimize the anxiety. For example:

Prepare ahead of time: It may sound simplistic, but getting a jumpstart on the process reduces a lot of stress. If you don’t start on the process until 6 or 8 months before the site visit, you are putting yourself squarely in the crosshairs of some serious stress and anxiety.

Ideally, quality assurance should be an integral part of every program. There really shouldn’t be any significant scrambling or looking for data. Your institution should already be reviewing, analyzing, looking for trends, and making data-driven decisions to improve programs on a continual basis. You should plan on starting your Self-Study Report (SSR) or Quality Assurance Report (QAR) no later than 18 months prior to a scheduled site visit. The more you delay this timetable, the higher your stress level will be. Guaranteed.

Hire a consultant: Let’s face it–not everyone has a lot of expertise when it comes to writing self-study reports, gathering evidence, and preparing for site visits. In many institutions, departments are understaffed and often wear multiple hats of responsibility. Most institutions don’t have to deal with accreditation matters on a regular basis. Therefore, few have a high level of confidence in that area. Plus, writing for accreditation, state program approvals, and the like requires a very different skillset than our typical academic writing.

In some schools, new faculty are tasked with coordinating a site visit because more seasoned faculty refuse to do it. This is wrong on so many levels, and yet it’s a frequent occurrence. An experienced consultant could provide the kind of guidance and support that may be needed. The institution doesn’t incur the expense of paying for someone’s full-time salary, benefits, or office space. In this age of budget cuts, hiring an independent contractor can actually save money.

Provide faculty/staff training: Letting others know what to expect and getting them on board early on will greatly reduce anxiety for everyone. Plan a kickoff event and then schedule periodic retreats/advances. Create a solid communication protocol and stick with it. When team members are fully informed and are active contributors to the process, the stress is reduced for everyone. Again, a good consultant can create this type of project management schema and even oversee it.

Delegate to others as much as possible: It’s important to have a project manager/coordinator for every major project, and that includes accreditation site visits and program reviews. However, that does NOT mean that this one person needs to take on the bulk of the responsibility—quite the contrary. Instead, that person should serve as a “conduit” who facilitates the flow of information between internal and external stakeholders. That person should also play the primary role in delegating tasks to appropriate personnel and then making sure those tasks are actually completed on time.

It’s OK to talk about it: Know that a certain amount of stress and anxiety are normal reactions to accreditation site visit preparation, but it doesn’t have to be overwhelming. Don’t be afraid to talk with your colleagues and leadership about your stress level. It’s entirely possible that others share your feelings—it might be helpful to start a small informal support group. Getting together one day a week for lunch (in person or remotely) works wonders.

Be upfront with your friends and loved ones:  Prepare family and friends ahead of time. Help them to know what to expect. Include them in the celebration once it’s over. Your children, significant other, and close friends may not be writing the self-study report or creating pieces of evidence. Your support system also plays an important role in the site review process behind the scenes.

Be kind to yourself: This may sound silly but it’s really important. Purposely build one nice thing into your personal calendar each day. It may be taking a walk, working out, or reading for pleasure for 30 minutes. Regardless what you choose, it’s crucial that you make this a part of your schedule.

Be ready when it’s over:  You may find that you can hold yourself together from start to finish, but then after the site review team packs up and leaves your institution you have a feeling of not quite knowing what to do with yourself. What you’ve focused all your energy on for 18 months is suddenly over. This can result in your emotions taking a deep dive—and it can last for several weeks.

You can greatly reduce this by planning a combination of fun activities and work activities for your next four weeks after the site visit. You’ve been functioning within a very structured paradigm for several months. However, if you suddenly have nothing to do it will likely lead to additional anxiety so it’s best to transition back slowly.

The bottom line is that while accreditation stress is definitely real, it doesn’t have to get the best of you or your team.

###

 

About the Author: A former higher education college administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) and Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Graphic Credit:  Luis Villasmil on Unsplash

 

 

 

CPL and CBE in Higher Education

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Student demonstrating electric circuit boards through PLC and CBE

In today’s higher education scene, we often hear the terms Credit for Prior Learning (CPL) and Competency-Based Education (CBE) tossed around a lot. While they both aim to recognize learning outside of traditional classrooms, they’re not the same thing, and knowing the difference can help educators and students make the most of these options.

What is Credit for Prior Learning (CPL)?

CPL is all about awarding academic credit for what students have learned through real-life experiences—like jobs, volunteering, or independent study. Usually, students create a portfolio that showcases their experiences and connects them to specific course outcomes. Schools then evaluate these portfolios to determine how much credit a student can receive.

What is Competency-Based Education (CBE)?

CBE takes a different approach. It focuses on students showing that they’ve mastered certain skills or competencies defined by their program. This can include direct assessments like exams, projects, or clinical experiences, and indirect assessments, such as self-reflections or peer evaluations. The goal here is to ensure students can demonstrate what they’ve learned in practical settings.

Key Differences Between CPL and CBE

Chart showing key differences between CPL and CBE

Regulatory and Accreditation Considerations

When rolling out CPL and CBE programs, institutions must keep an eye on various regulations and accreditation requirements:

  • Federal Regulations: The U.S. Department of Education has specific guidelines for CBE programs, especially for those looking for federal aid. For CPL, there are limits on how much of a program can be completed through prior learning assessment to qualify for aid.
  • Accreditation Standards: Various institutional (regional) accreditors have unique standards for CPL and CBE. For example, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) has specific guidelines for CBE regarding faculty qualifications and assessment methods.
  • State Authorization: If institutions offer CBE programs across state lines online, they need to comply with varying state requirements. The State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA) can help simplify this, but it has its own rules.
  • Credit Hour Equivalencies: It’s essential to establish clear policies on how competencies or prior learning convert to credit hours, aligning with accreditor and federal definitions.
  • Assessment Documentation: Keeping detailed records of assessment processes and outcomes is crucial for demonstrating program quality to accreditors.
  • Regular Review and Reporting: University personnel should set up processes for regularly reviewing CPL and CBE programs to stay compliant with changing regulations and standards. Be ready to report on student progress and outcomes in your annual reports and in self-study reports in preparation for reaccreditation site reviews.
  • Substantive Change Notifications: If your institution is planning to launch new CBE programs or expanding CPL offerings, be aware that this may require notifying accreditors of substantial changes.

Conclusion

While CPL and CBE both aim to enhance learning and credit recognition, they serve different purposes and use different methods. Understanding these differences is key for educators and administrators. By following best practices and keeping regulatory considerations in mind, institutions can create strong programs that meet diverse learner needs and promote academic success.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit: Jeswin Thomas on Unsplash

Interview Preparation: An Essential Part of a Successful CAEP Site Visit

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
CAEP Interview Preparation

Let’s cut to the chase: Interview preparation is one of the best things an institution can do to ensure a successful accreditation outcome.

Preparing for an accreditation site visit is always stressful for higher education faculty and staff, even under the best of circumstances. Depending on whether it’s a regional (institutional) accrediting body, a state compliance audit, or a programmatic accreditor, there are certain processes and procedures that must be followed. While each body has its own nuances, there’s one thing institutions should do to prepare, and that is to help their interviewees prepare.  This piece will focus helping educator preparation programs prepare for a Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) site visit.

Important note: The guidance below focuses exclusively on the final months and weeks leading up to a site visit. The actual preparation begins approximately 18 months before this point, when institutions typically start drafting their Self-Study Report (SSR).

2-4 Months Prior to the Site Visit

Approximately 2-4 months prior to a site visit, the CAEP team lead meet virtually with the educator preparation program (EPP) administrator(s) and staff. Sometimes, representatives of that state’s department of education will participate. By the end of this meeting, all parties should be “on the same page” and should be clear regarding what to expect in the upcoming site visit. This includes a general list of who the team will likely want to speak with when the time comes.

A Word About Virtual and/or Hybrid Site Reviews

The onset of Covid-19 precipitated a decision by CAEP to switch from onsite reviews to a virtual format. Virtual or hybrid virtual site reviews require a different type of preparation than those that are conducted exclusively onsite. I think the more we start to see Covid in the rearview mirror, the more accreditors may start to gradually ease back into onsite reviews, or at least a hybrid model. I provided detailed guidance for onsite reviews in a previous post.

CAEP has assembled some very good guidelines for hosting effective accreditation virtual site visits, and I recommend that institutional staff familiarize themselves with those guidelines well in advance of their review.

Interviews: So Important in a CAEP Site Visit

Regardless of whether a site visit is conducted on campus or virtually, there’s something very common:

An institution can submit a stellar Self-Study Report and supporting pieces of evidence, only to fail miserably during the site review itself. I’ve seen this happen over and over again.  Why? Because they don’t properly prepare interviewees. Remember that the purpose of site visit interviews is twofold:

First, site team reviewers need to corroborate what an institution has stated in their Self-Study Report, Addendum, and supporting pieces of evidence. In other words:

Is the institution really doing what they say they’re doing?

For example, if the institution has stated in their written documents that program staff regularly seek out and act on recommendations from their external stakeholders and partners, you can almost bet that interviewees will be asked about this. Moreover, they’ll be asked to cite specific examples. And they won’t just pose this question to one person. Instead, site team reviewers will attempt to corroborate information from multiple interviewees.

Second, site team reviewers use interviews for follow-up and answering remaining questions that still linger after reading the documents that were previously submitted. So for example, if both the Self-Study Report and the Addendum didn’t provide sufficient details regarding how program staff ensure that internally created assessments meet criteria for quality, they will make that a focus in several interviews.

In most instances, the site team lead will provide a list of individuals who can respond accurately and confidently to team members’ questions. Within the educator preparation landscape, typical examples include:

However, I had seen instances where the team lead asks the institution to put together this list. Staff need to be prepared for either scenario.

Mock Visits: Essential to Site Review Interview Preparation

Just as you wouldn’t decide a month in advance that you’re going to run a marathon when the farthest you’ve been walking is from the couch to the kitchen, it’s to an institution’s peril if they don’t fully prepare for an upcoming site visit regardless of whether it’s onsite, virtual, or hybrid.

I’ve come to be a big believer in mock visits. When I first started working in compliance and accreditation many years ago, I never saw their value. Truthfully, I saw them as a waste of time. In my mind, while not perfect, our institution was doing a very good job of preparing future teachers. And, we had submitted a Self-Study Report and supporting pieces of evidence which we believed communicated that good work. We took great care in the logistics of the visit and when the time came, we were filled with confidence about its outcome. There was one problem:

We didn’t properly prepare the people who were going to be interviewed.

During site visits, people are nervous. They’re terrified they’ll say the wrong thing, such as spilling the beans about something the staff hopes the site team reviewers won’t ask about. It happens. Frequently.

When we’re nervous, some talk rapidly and almost incoherently. Some won’t talk at all. Others will attempt to answer questions but fail to cite specific examples to back up their points. And still others can be tempted to use site visit interviews as an opportunity to air their grievances about program administrators. I’ve seen each and every one of these scenarios play out.

This is why it’s critical to properly prepare interviewees for this phase of the program review. And this can best be done through a mock site visit. Another important thing to keep in mind is that the mock visit should mirror the same format that site team members will use to conduct their program review. In other words, if the site visit will be conducted onsite, the mock visit should be conducted that same way. If it’s going to be a virtual site visit, then the mock should follow suit.

Bite the bullet, hire a consultant, and pay them to do this for you.

It simply isn’t as effective when this is done in-house by someone known in the institution. A consultant should be able to generate a list of potential questions based on the site team’s feedback in the Formative Feedback Report. In addition to running a risk assessment, a good consultant should be able to provide coaching guidance for how interviewees can communicate more effectively and articulately. And finally, at the conclusion of the mock visit, they should be able to provide institutional staff with a list of specific recommendations for what they need to continue working on in the weeks leading up to the site visit in order to best position themselves for a positive outcome.

If you’re asking if I perform this service for my clients, the answer is yes. There is no downside to preparation, and I strongly encourage all institutions to incorporate this piece into their planning and budget.

While the recommendations above may feel exhausting, they’re not exhaustive. I’ve touched on some of the major elements of site visit preparation here but there are many more. Feel free to reach out to me if I can support your institution’s CAEP site visit effort.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Graphic Credit: Pexels

 

Teacher Effectiveness & Positive Impact: The Dynamic Duo

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Shaping Lifelong Learners: The Symbiosis of Teacher Effectiveness and Positive Impact

In education, a lot of emphasis is placed on teacher effectiveness and positive impact, as it should be. It’s widely accepted that teachers are highly influential on students, and that influence doesn’t just stop at the end of the school day or even the school year. Teachers have the ability to impact students’ learning and achievement for many years.

As a society, we want to know that those responsible for instructing our children are competent, caring, reflective, and ethical. We want teachers to possess the kind of skills, knowledge, and dispositions they need to model positive behaviors and support students in their learning and development.

Principals typically are responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of teachers in their building. They come in a few times per year and formally observe and evaluate each teacher “in action” while they’re teaching a lesson. Principals then rate teachers on their effectiveness using various district-approved criteria.

In addition, colleges and universities that prepare future teachers also play an important role in ensuring their graduates will be effective in the classroom.

That said, teacher effectiveness and having a positive impact on students’ learning and development are related concepts but are not necessarily synonymous. In fact, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), a leading national accrediting body, requires educator preparation providers to show the extent to which program completers are having a positive impact on the learning and development of their P-12 students. However, despite publishing a guide on the topic, the accrediting body doesn’t clearly articulate that while these terms go hand in glove, they are not the same and can’t be measured in the same way.

In order to have well-rounded, successful learners, we need to see evidence of both teacher effectiveness and positive impact. Here’s a brief explanation of the differences between the two:

Measuring Effectiveness vs. Impact

No doubt about it: We need teachers to plan lessons that are aligned to state standards. They must design learning experiences that will help students grasp important skills and concepts throughout the school year. There continues to be a heavy emphasis on using high stakes standardized assessments to measure student learning and subsequently, teacher effectiveness. However, an assessment is typically not a good way to truly measure positive impact. How, for example, can a test determine a student’s love for learning or their social development?

Teacher Effectiveness and Positive Impact

Long-Term vs. Short-Term Outcomes

We all want to see immediate results. When we change our diet or increase our exercise, we typically expect to see outcomes pretty quickly when we climb on the scale, and we’re elated when we see those pounds going down and feel those clothes become looser. However, we may not realize the long-term impact of those efforts for many months or years later. Lowering our cholesterol, taking pressure off our joints, and the like can take quite a while to notice, and can be hard to measure. This is similar in some ways to teacher effectiveness and positive impact:

Long Term vs. Short Term Outcomes

Holistic Development vs. Academic Achievement

We certainly need to support our students’ learning. They need to know facts and critical information about a variety of topics. In turn, they must be able to demonstrate what they know and are able to do within both formal and informal assessments. However, students also need to learn how to interact positively with others, solving problems and conflicts in a way that meets their needs while also treating others with respect. In other words, they need to develop life skills.

Holistic Development vs. Academic Achievement

Student Engagement and Motivation

We need safe, orderly classrooms with sufficient structure, but yet we also need to create learning environments that encourage students to stretch their minds, explore their dreams, and begin the journey of becoming eager lifelong learners.

Student Engagement and Motivation

Striking the Balance: Unveiling the Dual Roles of Effective Teaching

So, a teacher can be effective in a single lesson, or over a unit of study. They can create an orderly, calm learning environment where students are well-behaved. They can create and deliver instructional lessons that are aligned to state standards, and their students can perform well on formative and summative assessments. Those are all examples of teacher effectiveness, and we certainly want that.

However, we also need our teachers to support their students as individuals, helping them to feel excited and motivated. We need teachers to encourage learners to think creatively and critically and ask questions. We want educators to empower students so they gradually take on a greater role in their own learning and decision making. Those are the kinds of influences teachers can and should have on their students, because those are skills that students will carry with them for the rest of their lives. That’s positive impact.

Beyond the Classroom: Nurturing Effective Teachers for Lasting Impact

In summary, while teacher effectiveness is an important aspect of education, having a positive impact on students’ learning and development involves a more comprehensive and long-term perspective. It extends beyond academic achievements to encompass holistic growth and lifelong learning skills. Teacher education program faculty should integrate these concepts into their coursework and clinical experiences. They should also be working in partnership with local school districts by exchanging ideas and providing professional development. Developing highly effective teachers who make a positive impact on students’ learning and development requires a concerted effort, and it doesn’t happen overnight.

###

 

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP). She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

Top Photo Credit: Zainul Yasni on Unsplash 

Career-Focused Outcomes in Higher Education

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Career-Focused Outcomes in Higher Education

In an educational landscape where scrutiny is high, academic institutions find themselves under the microscope, particularly in demonstrating their value to stakeholders. To address this, colleges and universities must articulate their commitment to preparing students for the workforce effectively. This involves not only showcasing career-focused outcomes but also ensuring a tangible return on investment. Metrics have become the tool of choice, allowing institutions to gauge success both at a macro and micro level.

From Classroom to Career

It’s so important for colleges and universities to show the academic community, as well as the public at large, that they provide good value for the money that students, donors, and taxpayers invest in them each year. One of the ways they do this is through career-focused outcomes. Higher education institutions must be able to answer questions like:

Career-Focused Outcomes

Career-Focused Outcomes Using a Macro vs. Micro Lens

Metrics like these are measured in various ways. An entire institution, for example, may view this through a broad lens, and may answer questions like these from a macro perspective. However, each academic program should be able to collect, analyze, and interpret data tailored to its specific area in order to answer the ROI question from more of a drilled-down, micro perspective.

Teacher Effectiveness and Positive Impact

In educator preparation, for example, one important indicator of a program’s quality can be found in the performance of its graduates, typically up to three years post-graduation. Teacher preparation program faculty and staff must look closely at a large number of performance indicators, two of which are teacher effectiveness and positive impact on student learning. These are related concepts, but they are not necessarily synonymous. Let’s break down the similarities and differences:

Similarities

  • Focus on Student Outcomes: Both teacher effectiveness and positive impact center around achieving positive outcomes in students’ learning and development.
  • Student Progress: Both concepts involve assessing and improving students’ progress, academic achievements, and overall growth.

Differences

  • Teacher effectiveness: Typically refers to how well a teacher can facilitate learning and engage students in the educational process. It is often measured through various factors such as classroom management skills, instructional techniques, subject knowledge, and adherence to curriculum standards. Typical pieces of evidence for determining teacher effectiveness often include peer observations, principal evaluations, a review of teaching methods, lesson plans, and classroom management practices.
  • Positive Impact on Students:  Involves not only effective teaching but also fostering a supportive and motivating environment that contributes to students’ personal and academic growth. It goes beyond traditional academic metrics and may include factors like students’ social-emotional development, critical thinking skills, and overall well-being. Evidence for positive impact can include student testimonials, changes in behavior or attitudes, academic improvement, and long-term success beyond the classroom. Another way schools and states try to determine positive impact comes from value-added data, which involves measures that typically focus on quantifying the specific contribution a teacher makes to students’ academic achievement, often measured through standardized test scores.

Conclusion

It is very important for higher education institutions to create a well-balanced schema for answering questions related to job preparation, positive impact, and overall return on investment. They must collect and analyze data from a variety of internal and external high-quality assessments. It’s about tracking results over time and making informed decisions with a commitment to continuous improvement.

In essence, the pursuit of showcasing career-focused outcomes is a collective effort that involves the institution as a whole and each academic program individually. By embracing a holistic perspective and delving into program-specific metrics, colleges and universities can not only provide answers to pertinent questions, but also demonstrate their unwavering commitment to delivering value in the evolving landscape of higher education.

###

 

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP). She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit:

Competency-Based Education: A Paradigm Shift in Higher Learning

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
CBE A Paradigm Shift in Higher Learning

We need a paradigm shift in higher learning. For over a century, the Carnegie Unit has been the cornerstone of American education, providing a time-based standard for student progress. However, as the landscape of education evolves, the limitations of this model become apparent, prompting educators to explore innovative alternatives. One such model gaining significant traction is Competency-Based Education (CBE). In this post, I’ll delve into the merits of CBE and offer some practical tips for higher education professionals looking to pilot this transformative approach. 

Rethinking Education in the 21st Century

The traditional education model often propels students forward collectively, irrespective of individual learning paces or abilities. The disruption caused by events like COVID-19 has underscored the need for a more adaptive and personalized approach. We know that each learner is different, and they come with a variety of learning needs as well as life and work experiences. For too long, we’ve used a cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all approach to teaching and learning — particularly at the higher education level. Enter Competency-Based Education, a paradigm that requires learners to demonstrate their understanding and skills through rigorous assessments rather than mere attendance. It also requires faculty members, administrators, and other staff to rethink their roles and how they support students through their academic journey.

Unveiling the Essence of CBE

Competency-Based Education isn’t about taking the easy route; it’s about embracing a different and more effective methodology. Instead of passively absorbing information, students are challenged to showcase their knowledge and abilities through high-quality assessments. This approach is inherently standards-based and is built on evolving educational and/or industry-specific standards. This is far different from what most faculty members are used to, when they alone decide what content to teach in their classes, how students will meet their expectations, and the pace at which students may progress through a course. 

Key Principles of Competency-Based Education

Traditional learning and CBE learning share a common goal of wanting students to be successful. It’s how they meet that goal that’s different. Here are some key “big picture” ways where a competency-based model is quite different from a traditional course-based model:

Competency-based education is a paradigm shift in higher learning.

A Paradigm Shift: Tips for Piloting CBE in Higher Education

I’ve presented at conferences on this topic, and multiple times have been approached by a college dean or department chair who was interested in bringing the CBE model to their campus. Few realize that changing to this model — either retrofitting an existing program or creating a program from scratch — require a considerable paradigm shift not only to academics, but to infrastructure services (i.e., enrollment & admissions, registrar, bookstore, academic advising, etc.). I even had a dean once pull out a pen and small tablet out of her purse, waiting for me to give her three easy steps to CBE, as if it was a biscuit recipe. The truth is, competency-based education is a complex approach to teaching and learning. Once it’s in place, the payoff can be tremendous — but stakeholders must understand the cultural changes that must take place in order for CBE to become a long-term reality within their institutions.

Here are a few key tips for launching CBE at the higher education level: CBE is a paradigm shift in higher learning.

A Long-Term Commitment to Student Success

Competency-Based Education is not a quick fix, but a powerful, long-term solution to enhance student learning, achievement, and satisfaction. It truly is a paradigm shift in higher learning. I think it’s time to take the leap into a future where education adapts to the needs of the learner.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP). She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

Top Photo Credit: Kaleidico on Unsplash 

CBE: A Transformative Approach for Higher Learning

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
CBE

Introduction

In the dynamic landscape of education, where the needs and expectations of learners continue to evolve, Competency-Based Education (CBE) stands out as a powerful and adaptive model. Initially prevalent in P-12 schools, CBE is progressively gaining recognition and traction in higher education. For those interested in exploring new and better ways to meet the needs of learners, it’s crucial to understand the transformative potential of CBE and how to initiate this innovative model in your institution.

Understanding the Core Principles of Competency-Based Education

Demonstrative Assessment

CBEIn a CBE, students showcase their knowledge and skills through a variety of high-quality formative and summative assessments. This approach shifts the focus from traditional testing to a more comprehensive evaluation of a student’s true understanding and application of concepts.

Measurable and Clear Expectations

CBE emphasizes measurable and clearly defined expectations. Learners are aware of the specific targets they need to reach in order to demonstrate competency or proficiency in key concepts or skills aligned with standards. This clarity empowers students to take ownership of their learning journey.

Outcome Over Seat Time

Let’s face it: We’ve all had students who showed up for class, but never answered a question and could barely stay awake. Or they sat glued to their phone throughout the period and couldn’t wait to make their exit. Unlike traditional models that rely on seat time, CBE prioritizes what students learn rather than how long they spend in a classroom. This flexibility allows students to progress at their own pace, accommodating those with diverse life or work experiences who may not require a conventional college experience.

Mentorship Model

Faculty members transition from direct instructors to mentors or learning coaches. This shift is fundamental in supporting student learning, enabling them to work independently and guiding them through their educational journey. The mentorship model fosters a personalized approach to education. Truthfully, some faculty members have a difficult time in making this transition. But for those who are able, it can be tremendously satisfying to support students on their educational journey, rather than being the sage on the stage.

Data-Driven Decisions

Instructional decisions in a CBE environment are data-driven. Regular assessments provide valuable insights into student progress, allowing faculty to tailor their support and interventions based on individual needs. This personalized approach contributes to a more effective learning experience.

Navigating CBE Implementation Challenges

CBEInitiating CBE at the college or university level requires a comprehensive institutional commitment. This commitment involves a paradigm shift in the faculty model, changes in registration and scheduling processes, and adaptations to student support services. Here are a few practical tips to navigate these challenges:

Faculty Development

Invest in comprehensive faculty training programs to equip educators with the skills and mindset required for the mentorship role. Workshops on coaching techniques, personalized learning strategies, and outcome-oriented assessment methods can be invaluable.

Flexible Scheduling and Registration

Redefine traditional scheduling structures to accommodate the individualized pace of CBE. Implement flexible course structures and explore modular approaches to allow students to progress based on their demonstrated competencies.

Technology Integration

Leverage educational technology to facilitate personalized learning pathways. Learning management systems, data analytics tools, and adaptive learning platforms can enhance the effectiveness of CBE by providing real-time insights into student performance.

Communication and Marketing

Effectively communicate the benefits of CBE to both faculty and students. Highlight the flexibility, personalized learning experiences, and real-world applicability of competencies acquired. Develop marketing strategies to attract students who seek a non-traditional educational experience.

Accreditation Alignment

Collaborate with accrediting bodies to ensure that your institution’s competency-based instructional models align with their standards. Stay informed about modifications in regulations and actively engage in discussions with accrediting agencies to demonstrate the effectiveness and rigor of the CBE approach. While hesitant at first, many accrediting bodies such as the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), and other bodies recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) have modified their regulations to include competency-based instructional models.

Embracing the Future of Education

CBEWhile the transition to Competency-Based Education may present challenges, the benefits are substantial. It provides a pathway for institutions to meet the needs of a diverse student population, acknowledging the rich experiences that learners bring to the table. Moreover, the flexibility of CBE can be a strategic advantage in attracting a broader range of students.

As pioneers in higher education, faculty, department chairs, deans, provosts, and accreditation specialists have the opportunity to shape the future of learning. By embracing the principles of CBE and strategically navigating the implementation challenges, institutions can create an environment that not only meets the evolving needs of students but also positions them as leaders in innovative education.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit: Dollar Gill on Unsplash

 

Quality Assurance System: The Drivetrain of Institutional Effectiveness

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Quality Assurance System

If you spend much time at all within the accreditation space, you’ll undoubtedly hear someone in higher education say, “Oh, we have a Quality Assurance System (QAS); we use _________.” They’ll proudly point to a license agreement they have with a company, where student work or assessment results are uploaded and stored. Some use that service to run data reports and are thrilled to share that it even “does data analysis.” Unfortunately, those well-intentioned individuals are missing the mark when it comes to a QAS.

A Quality Assurance System is really like the drivetrain of our car—without it we’d get nowhere, stuck along the side of the road. We’d know we had a problem, but without that drivetrain we may not know how to resolve our issue. We’d be wondering what to do next.

What a Quality Assurance System Isn’t

It’s important to remember that a Quality Assurance System isn’t a software program or a subscription-based website. It’s a well-planned and executed system by which institutions and individual programs monitor quality on key performance indicators. They then use insights gleaned from trendlines to make data-informed programmatic decisions.

Essential Components of a Healthy QAS

A healthy, solid quality assurance system requires a well-defined schema that involves looking at multiple data sources and being able to triangulate those data over time to look for patterns, trends, strengths, and weaknesses. And it shouldn’t just be one or two people reviewing data—there should be groups and advisory boards assigned to this task. Why? So steps can be taken to make improvements when the need arises.

High Quality Assessments

 

A well-functioning QAS requires using a blend of both proprietary and internally created high quality assessments. We know that data are only as good as the assessments themselves. Great care must be taken when creating key assessments to ensure that each measure what they are intended to measure (content validity) and that they see consistency in assessment results over multiple administrations (reliability). Surveys need to be created with a manageable number of questions, and items should be worded clearly. New assessments need to be piloted according to widely accepted protocols.

Real-Life Assessment Examples

Some examples of proprietary assessments that colleges and universities often use include the SAT, ACT, GRE, edTPA, Praxis, NCLEX, and so on. In other words, these are standardized high-stakes assessments that have been developed and road-tested by assessment development companies.

Internally created assessments, on the other hand, are those institutions create “in-house” for a variety of purposes. For example, it’s common for colleges to survey their students at the end of each semester to determine their satisfaction with their instructors, the quality of the food in the cafeteria, advising services, and so on. Faculty within programs also develop what they consider to be key assessments–perhaps 5-7 that are required by all students to monitor their skills development as they progress in a particular licensure track program. These are often cornerstone assessments in a select group of courses, and they can provide valuable insight regarding student performance as well as the quality of the program itself.

Stakeholder Input

A solid QAS depends on stakeholder input, both internal and external stakeholders. Faculty, student support staff, current students, graduates, and members of the community or business and industry should serve in advisory capacities. Each individual brings a unique set of experiences and perspectives to the table, and diversity of thought can enrich programs.

Real Life Stakeholder Examples

Internal stakeholders include current and past students, faculty members, academic advisors, and so on. External stakeholders are those on the outside of the college or university. They include employers, individuals who have graduated more than a year ago, members of relevant civic groups, and so on. It’s really important to garner the perspective of those who are from within the institution as well as those who are on the outside looking in.

The Ultimate Goal: Continuous Program Improvement

And finally, a well-functioning Quality Assurance System must enable institutions to make data-informed decisions with confidence, for the purpose of continuous program improvement. Staff must be able to identify specific areas of strength, as well as specific areas for growth and improvement. They need to know if an approach or a policy is working or not. And they need a leg to stand on when it comes to making programmatic changes. That leg needs to be grounded in high quality data. Having well-functioning Quality Assurance Systems will support colleges and universities in their accreditation efforts, state program approvals, and growth. They truly are the drivetrain of institutional effectiveness.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com 

Top Photo Credit: Samuele Errico Piccarini on Unsplash 

 

Fostering Student Success: The Significance of Transition Points in Higher Education Programs

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Transition Points

Introduction

In the dynamic landscape of higher education, successful program completion involves more than just attending classes and earning credits. It requires a structured and purposeful journey through well-defined transition points or milestones. These markers delineate specific phases of progress that students must navigate to ensure they are well-prepared for the challenges that lie ahead. This is especially crucial in licensure-based programs like nursing and teacher education, where the sequential mastery of skills is paramount.

The Protective Structure of Transition Points

Transition points are not arbitrary hurdles; they are a safeguard, ensuring that students progress through a program in a planned and thoughtful manner. The structure serves to protect students and foster their success. It prevents them from signing up for an advanced level course before they have successfully completed foundational level work. Moreover, these gateways provide them with a chance to build their developing skills in key areas before engaging in field experiences. And, by adhering to established transition points, students are much more likely to graduate on time, pass licensure examinations, and get hired for a job in their chosen profession after graduation.

Key Criteria for Identifying Transition Points

Department chairs and faculty should carefully consider various criteria when determining the right transition points. For example:

Transition Points Checklist

 

A Transition Points Framework

To guide educators in implementing effective transition points, a customizable framework can be immensely beneficial. For instance, in educator preparation programs, a five-point model might include:

Transition Points

 

This framework acts as a roadmap, offering a detailed depiction of a student’s progression from matriculation to program completion. Each transition point represents a crucial phase, ensuring that students are adequately prepared before advancing to the next stage. As long as a student meets the stated expectations, the journey continues and they move ahead toward graduation. If the student fails to meet one or more expectations in a given stage, the institution implements a plan for remediation, additional support, or in some case, counseling out of the program.

Conclusion

Transition points are the linchpin of a successful higher education program, providing a structured path for students to navigate. Through careful consideration of key criteria and the implementation of a tailored framework, educators can guide students toward timely graduation, licensure success, and a seamless transition into their chosen professions. By prioritizing these markers, institutions not only protect the interests of their students but also contribute to the overall success and reputation of their programs.

###

 

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit: Clay Banks on Unsplash 

Examples and Exemplars in Regulatory Spaces

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Examples and Exemplars in Regulatory Space

Introduction

Embarking on the journey of launching a new program at your college or university is an exciting endeavor, but the regulatory landscape can be a daunting terrain to navigate. Many college and university personnel find themselves grappling with uncertainty about what evidence to provide and how to demonstrate compliance with specific standards set by institutional or programmatic accreditors. In an era where higher education websites offer a plethora of examples, it’s crucial to understand the distinction between examples and exemplars when it comes to the regulatory space. While examples can serve as general guides, they should not be mistaken for perfect templates. Here I shed light on this crucial distinction and provide higher education staff with actionable tips for a smoother regulatory approval process.

Understanding the Difference Between Examples and Exemplars

Before delving into the tips, it’s important to clarify the difference between examples and exemplars when working in the regulatory space. Examples are instances of documents, reports, or data submitted by other institutions to accrediting bodies. They can serve as helpful references, offering insight into the types of information that might be required. On the other hand, exemplars are not just examples; they are models of excellence. Exemplars represent the gold standard, and assuming that any document submitted by another institution is flawless can lead to significant pitfalls. Recognizing this distinction is the first step toward a more informed and successful regulatory approval process.

 

Alternatives to Using Examples & Exemplars in Regulatory Work

Customization is Key

While examples can provide a starting point, it’s crucial to customize documents and evidence to align with the unique characteristics of your institution and the proposed program. Copying and pasting from examples might not capture the specific nuances and strengths of your institution, potentially leading to a misrepresentation of your capabilities.

Engage in Peer Collaboration

Instead of relying solely on online examples, consider engaging in collaborative efforts with peer institutions. Sharing insights, challenges, and successful strategies with institutions facing similar regulatory processes can offer a more nuanced understanding. Peer collaboration allows for the exchange of real-world experiences and promotes a collective learning environment.

Regularly Review and Update Documentation

The regulatory landscape evolves, and so should your documentation. Rather than relying solely on outdated examples, strive to stay abreast of changes in accreditation standards and requirements. Regularly review and update your documentation to reflect any new expectations, ensuring that your submission remains relevant and compliant.

Seek Guidance from Accreditation Experts

Most institutions have dedicated accreditation liaisons or experts who can provide valuable guidance. These individuals possess an in-depth understanding of accreditation standards and can offer insights tailored to your institution’s context. Consult with them regularly to ensure your documentation meets the necessary criteria and standards. That said, some colleges and universities don’t have the luxury of full-time compliance and accreditation experts on staff. On the other hand, there may not be anyone who’s had experience working with a particular state agency or accrediting body. In those cases, hiring a consultant can be a wise investment.

Use Examples Judiciously

Examples can be powerful tools when used judiciously. Rather than mirroring another institution’s document entirely, extract relevant concepts, structures, and approaches that align with your institution’s context. Adapting best practices from examples can enhance the quality of your submission without compromising authenticity.

 

Conclusion

In the realm of regulatory matters, the journey to program approval requires careful consideration, strategic planning, and a nuanced approach to documentation. While examples can serve as valuable guides, they should not be misconstrued as flawless templates. The key lies in understanding the unique needs of your institution and tailoring documentation accordingly. By following these tips, higher education staff can navigate the regulatory landscape with confidence, ensuring that their submissions stand out for their authenticity and compliance.

###

 

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Photo Credit: Gabrielle Henderson on Unsplash 

 

Transforming Higher Education: The Power of Student Mentoring Programs

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Mentoring

Introduction

In the ever-evolving landscape of higher education, the quest for student success remains a central concern for colleges and universities across the United States. While academic advisors play a pivotal role in guiding students through their educational journey, a more personalized and intensive approach is required to meet the needs of at-risk students. This is where student mentoring programs step in. Here I explore the concept of student mentoring in higher education — delving into its benefits, potential drawbacks, and its significant role in enhancing institutional effectiveness and accreditation efforts.

Understanding the Role of a Student Mentor

In traditional academic advising, the primary focus is on helping students chart their academic paths and assisting with course registration. However, there exists a group of students who require a more hands-on and personalized approach. These students, often referred to as at-risk, may struggle with various aspects of their college experience, be it academic, financial, or personal. A student mentor is a specially trained individual who goes beyond the traditional academic advisor’s role.

A mentor typically:

  • Interacts with students regularly: A mentor engages with the student multiple times each month through various communication channels, including email, phone calls, text messages, virtual conferences, or in-person meetings. This frequent interaction helps build a strong support system for the student.
  • Acts as a liaison: A mentor serves as a bridge between the student and various university services. If a student encounters difficulties with financial aid applications, the mentor can either assist directly or connect the student with the appropriate staff in the Financial Aid office. Similarly, if a student is struggling academically, the mentor can facilitate tutoring services.
  • Monitors student progress: If a student begins to miss classes or falls behind in their coursework, the mentor plays a proactive role in reaching out to the student. They work with the student to identify the reasons for their struggles and collaboratively develop a plan for academic success.

The Benefits of a Strong Mentoring Model

The traditional academic advising model often relies on students seeking assistance, which may not be sufficient for at-risk students. However, a strong mentorship model, where a mentor is assigned to a student upon matriculation and remains with them until graduation, offers numerous advantages:

  • Improved Student Success: A mentor’s consistent support and guidance significantly contribute to student success. At-risk students often face challenges that can derail their academic progress, and a mentor helps address these issues promptly, leading to higher achievement and improved GPA.
  • Enhanced Student Retention: By closely monitoring a student’s academic journey, a mentor can identify and address issues that may lead to dropouts. This proactive approach contributes to higher retention rates, which is a key concern for colleges and universities.
  • Greater Student Satisfaction: The personal connection and support provided by mentors lead to increased student satisfaction. Knowing there is someone dedicated to their success boosts students’ morale and confidence.
  • Improved Institutional Effectiveness: A well-structured mentorship program aligns with institutional effectiveness goals. It provides a systematic approach to monitor, support, and measure student success, helping institutions meet accreditation standards more effectively.
  • Accreditation Compliance: Accreditation bodies, such as the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), the Association for Biblical Higher Education (ABHE), and the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), emphasize the importance of demonstrating support for student success. A strong mentorship program positions institutions to meet these requirements effectively.

Challenges and Drawbacks to a Mentoring Model

While student mentoring programs offer immense benefits, there are challenges and potential drawbacks that institutions need to consider:

  • Financial Costs: Implementing a mentorship program requires hiring and training mentors, which can strain an institution’s budget. However, the long-term benefits often outweigh the initial costs.
  • Workload for Mentors: Mentors must be dedicated and properly trained to address a wide range of student needs. The workload can be intensive, and managing a caseload of at-risk students requires effective time management and organizational skills.
  • Scalability: Scaling a mentorship program to accommodate a growing student population can be challenging. Institutions must carefully plan and allocate resources to ensure the program’s success as the student body expands.
  • Cultural Shift: Shifting from a traditional academic advising model to a mentorship program may require a cultural shift within the institution. Faculty, staff, and students need to adapt to the new approach.

Practical Steps for Implementing a Student Mentorship Program

To successfully implement a student mentorship program in your institution, consider the following practical steps:

  • Assess Student Needs: Identify the specific needs of your student population. Conduct surveys, focus groups, and data analysis to understand the challenges at-risk students face.
  • Define Mentor Roles: Clearly outline the roles and responsibilities of mentors. Determine how they will interact with students and which services they will connect students with.
  • Mentor Training: Invest in comprehensive training for mentors, covering areas such as academic support, communication skills, and campus resources. Training is crucial for ensuring mentors are well-prepared to assist students effectively.
  • Integration with Existing Services: Ensure seamless integration with existing university services, such as academic advising, financial aid, and tutoring. Mentors should collaborate with these services to provide holistic support.
  • Data and Monitoring: Implement a data-driven approach to monitor the program’s impact on student success. Regularly assess the program’s effectiveness and make adjustments as needed.
  • Student Outreach: Promote the mentorship program to incoming students and engage them from day one. Assign mentors to students upon matriculation to establish a strong support system from the start.
  • Resources Allocation: Allocate necessary resources, both in terms of personnel and budget, to support the program. Consider seeking external funding sources if needed.

Conclusion

In the quest for higher education excellence and student success, student mentoring programs play a pivotal role. These programs provide a more personalized, proactive, and comprehensive approach to supporting at-risk students, ultimately leading to improved retention, student satisfaction, and academic success. While there are financial and logistical challenges, the long-term benefits, including compliance with accreditation standards and institutional effectiveness goals, make student mentoring a worthwhile investment for colleges and universities.

In a rapidly changing higher education landscape, the transformational power of student mentoring programs can be the catalyst for lasting change, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to thrive and succeed in their academic pursuits.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

Top Photo Credit:  Monica Melton on Unsplash

The Pillars of Data Consistency: Inter-Rater Reliability, Internal Consistency, and Consensus Building

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
data consistency

Introduction

Accreditation in higher education is like the North Star guiding the way for colleges and universities. It ensures institutions maintain the highest standards of educational quality. Yet, for higher education professionals responsible for completing this work, the journey is not without its challenges. One of the most critical challenges they face is ensuring the data consistency, or reliability, of key assessments. This is why inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and consensus building serve as some of the bedrocks of data-informed decision making. As the gatekeepers of quality assurance, higher education professionals should possess a working knowledge of these concepts. Below, I explain some basic concepts of inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and consensus building:

Inter-Rater Reliability

What it is: Inter-rater reliability assesses the degree of agreement or consistency between different people (raters, observers, assessors) when they are independently evaluating or scoring the same data or assessments.

Example: Imagine you have a group of teachers who are grading student essays. Inter-rater reliability measures how consistently these teachers assign grades. If two different teachers grade the same essay and their scores are very close, it indicates high inter-rater reliability. A similar example would be in an art competition, where multiple judges independently evaluate artworks based on criteria like composition, technique, and creativity. Inter-rater reliability is vital to ensure that artworks are judged consistently. If two judges consistently award high scores to the same painting, it demonstrates reliable evaluation in the competition.

Importance in Accreditation: In an educational context, it’s crucial to ensure that assessments are scored consistently, especially when accreditation bodies are evaluating the quality of education. This ensures fairness and objectivity in the assessment process.

Internal Consistency

What it is: Internal consistency assesses the reliability of a measurement tool or assessment by examining how well the different items or questions within that tool are related to each other.

Example: Think about a survey that asks multiple questions about the same topic. Internal consistency measures whether these questions consistently capture the same concept. For example, let’s say a teacher education program uses an employer satisfaction survey with multiple questions to evaluate various aspects of its program. Internal consistency ensures that questions related to a specific aspect (e.g., classroom management) yield consistent responses. If employers consistently rate the program quality highly across several related questions, it reflects high internal consistency in the survey.

Importance in Accreditation: When colleges and universities use assessment tools, they need to ensure that the questions within these tools are reliable. High internal consistency indicates that the questions are measuring the same construct consistently, which is important for accurate data in accreditation.

Consensus Building

What it is: Consensus building refers to the process of reaching agreement or alignment among different stakeholders or experts on a particular issue, decision, or evaluation.

Example: In an academic context, when faculty members and administrators come together to determine the learning outcomes for a program, they engage in consensus building. This involves discussions, feedback, and negotiation to establish common goals and expectations. Another example might be within the context of institutional accreditation, where an institution’s leadership, faculty, and stakeholders engage in consensus building when establishing long-term strategic goals and priorities. This process involves extensive dialogue and agreement on the institution’s mission, vision, and the strategies needed to achieve them.

Importance in Accreditation: Accreditation often involves multiple parties, such as faculty, administrators, and external accreditors. Consensus building is crucial to ensure that everyone involved agrees on the criteria, standards, and assessment methods. It fosters transparency and a shared understanding of what needs to be achieved.

Conclusion

In summary, inter-rater reliability focuses on the agreement between different evaluators, internal consistency assesses the reliability of assessment questions or items, and consensus building is about reaching agreement among stakeholders. All three are essential in ensuring that data used in the accreditation process is trustworthy, fair, and reflects the true quality of the institution’s educational programs.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialties: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) and the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com 

Top Photo Credit: Markus Spiske on Unsplash 

Persistence and Retention in Higher Education

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Persistence and Retention Word Cloud

In higher education, “persistence to graduation” and “retention” are related but distinct terms that are often used to measure and analyze student progress and institutional effectiveness. College and university personnel encounter them with working on institutional or programmatic accreditation efforts. These are confusing terms that are sometimes used interchangeably, and yet they are not synonymous.

For example, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) makes a distinction in its Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement (Criterion 4C).  In its Guiding Principle 2 (Standard IV), the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) requires member institutions to “…commit to student retention, persistence, completion, and success through a coherent and effective support system…”

Here’s a very quick overview of the difference between retention and persistence:

Retention

Retention refers to the percentage of students who continue their enrollment at the same institution from one academic year to the next. It measures how many students remain at the same college or university without transferring or dropping out.

Retention is primarily concerned with keeping students within the institution they initially enrolled in.

Persistence

Persistence, on the other hand, is a broader term that encompasses a student’s continuous pursuit of a degree or educational goal. It measures whether a student is consistently working toward completing their program or degree, regardless of whether they stay at the same institution or transfer.

Persistence focuses on the overall progress of a student toward their educational goal, which can involve transferring to another institution, taking breaks, or pursuing part-time studies.

The Bottom Line

In summary, while both persistence and retention are crucial metrics in higher education, they differ in focus and scope:

Retention is concerned with students staying at the same institution and measures institutional success in keeping students from leaving.

Persistence is concerned with students continuously working toward their educational goals, which may include transferring to other institutions, taking breaks, or pursuing part-time studies.

Higher education institutions and accreditation bodies use these terms to assess student success and institutional performance, with the goal of improving graduation rates and the overall quality of education. Both are important to quality assurance but are determined by different data.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Leveraging Stakeholder Involvement for Higher Education Quality Assurance

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
Stakeholder Group Meeting

In the realm of higher education, quality assurance and institutional effectiveness are paramount. Internal and external stakeholder groups, including students, faculty, alumni, employers, and community members play a pivotal role in this process. Their active involvement not only ensures transparency but also significantly contributes to accreditation efforts.

It seems that nearly everyone in higher education is aware of the need for stakeholder involvement–or say they are–but very few actually use it effectively. In this post, I delve into the importance of stakeholder involvement in higher education and provide some practical advice for colleges and universities to harness it effectively.

Why Stakeholder Involvement Is Vital

Engaging stakeholders brings diverse perspectives and valuable insights to the forefront. Here’s why their involvement is critical:

Enhanced Accountability

Stakeholder involvement fosters transparency and accountability within institutions. It ensures that decisions align with the needs and expectations of those they serve.  As members of the higher education community, we often develop “tunnel vision” and become so entrenched in our everyday institutional bubble that it’s possible to lose our perspective. As a result, we sometimes don’t consider things from a lens outside of our own. That’s where stakeholder groups can be so valuable to the accountability process.

Continuous Program Improvement

Regular feedback from stakeholders helps colleges and universities identify areas for enhancement. This feedback loop leads to ongoing program improvements, benefiting students and the broader community.  To that end, institutional accreditor Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) prompts university personnel to ensure that appropriate internal and external constituents and stakeholders are involved in the planning and evaluation process as part of their overall institutional planning and effectiveness model.

Accreditation Support

Accrediting bodies often require evidence of stakeholder involvement. Comprehensive records of these interactions streamline the accreditation process and bolster institutional credibility. That doesn’t mean, however, that we should just create an advisory board of some kind in name only. Nor should we hold our obligatory annual meetings for the purpose of simply checking a box and moving on. If institutions build a culture of continuous program improvement rather than a culture of compliance, they will realize just how important stakeholders can be to their regulatory success.

Initiating and Optimizing Stakeholder Involvement

Here are practical steps for college and university personnel to initiate and optimize stakeholder involvement:

Identify Your Key Stakeholders

Identify the primary internal and external stakeholders relevant to your institution, including students, part-time and full-time faculty, alumni, employers, business and industry representatives, and community organizations. Students, of course, should be viewed as the most critical stakeholder in higher education. To underscore the importance of this group, the Higher Learning Commission adopted it as Goal #1 in its Evolve 2025: Vision, Goals, and Action Steps.  It’s essential to select individuals who genuinely want to help you improve your institution. It’s also important to build a cadre of stakeholders who represent a variety of backgrounds and perspectives.

Set Clear Objectives

Determine the specific outcomes you need from your stakeholder groups. Are you seeking input on curriculum development, program evaluation, or community engagement initiatives? Having a clear purpose guides your efforts. For example, in its 2020 Guiding Principles and Standards for Business Accreditation, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) specifies that stakeholders should play a central role in developing and implementing a program’s strategic plan, in its scholarship, and in its quality assurance system.

Establish Communication Channels

Create multiple communication avenues with stakeholders, such as surveys, focus groups, advisory committees, and regular meetings. Ensure these channels are accessible and user-friendly. Maintaining effective communication and collaboration with stakeholder groups is considered to be part of an essential team of administrators that brings together and allocates resources to accomplish institutional goals, according to the Association for Biblical Higher Education (ABHE), an accreditor for faith-based institutions.

Meet Regularly

Meeting with stakeholders at least once a year is crucial. Consider more frequent interactions, such as quarterly or semi-annual meetings, to maintain engagement. Establishing positive relationships takes time, and this requires seeing stakeholders more than just once per year. Some institutions invite stakeholders to a monthly virtual meeting, supported by one or two onsite meetings. To encourage attendance and keep the momentum going, consider the value of variety: Invite students to come and speak or interact with advisory board members. Don’t overdo it but try to include at least one fun icebreaker or activity in each meeting. And above all else: Whenever possible, provide food. Educators have known about this for many years, and it’s still true today: If you feed them, they will come. 

Share Data

Share relevant data and information with stakeholders, including enrollment figures, student achievement data, and institutional goals. Providing context allows stakeholders to make informed recommendations. And don’t just sugarcoat everything–be real with your stakeholders. If you can’t trust them with data that may be less than desirable, why are they on your advisory board?

Establish a Positive Environment

Foster an open and inclusive environment where stakeholders feel valued and heard. Encourage constructive feedback and respect dissenting opinions. Hopefully, each member of the stakeholder group was selected with care because of the value they bring to the conversation. Assuming that’s the case, each person should walk away from meetings feeling as though their presence and participation mattered. It’s the job of the institutional leader to ensure that happens.

Create a Documentation Framework

Keep detailed records of stakeholder interactions, including meeting agendas, minutes, recommendations, and action items. These records serve as tangible evidence for accreditation purposes. We’ve all heard the saying, “If there’s no photo, it didn’t happen!” The same thinking applies with stakeholder meetings. If there’s no detailed record, it’s really the same as a meeting never taking place. All documents should contain enough details that someone outside the institution (such as an accreditor) could review them and understand who the members are, what the group’s purpose is, how often they meet, what they do, and how the institution’s personnel act on their recommendations.  Pro tip: Create a standard template for meeting agendas and minutes, and store all documents in a secure, university-approved cloud platform in an organized manner. Never store these items on a single user’s laptop.

Using Stakeholder Involvement Effectively

Simply hosting an annual stakeholder meeting to check off a compliance box isn’t good enough. Higher education personnel must weave their input into all facets of their institutional or programmatic structure.  The importance of this is emphasized by the 2023 standards adopted by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, where stakeholder involvement is featured in multiple standards. To maximize the benefits of stakeholder involvement, I recommend following these guidelines:

Act on Feedback

Don’t just collect feedback; act on it. Use stakeholder recommendations to drive meaningful change within your institution, demonstrating a commitment to improvement. For example, educator preparation accreditors such as the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP) and the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) both have expectations for utilizing input from teacher candidates, alumni, employers, P-12 partners, and the like.

Evaluate Impact

Regularly assess the impact of changes made based on stakeholder feedback to ensure ongoing positive progress. This is an essential component to your quality assurance system and to a continuous program improvement model. Advancing academic quality and continuous improvement are at the core of accreditation, according to the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).

Engage Diverse Voices

Ensure your stakeholder group represents a diverse range of perspectives, leading to more innovative and well-rounded solutions. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) emphasizes the need for multiple voices to be heard in its more recent set of Core Competences for Professional Nursing Education.

Communicate Outcomes

Keep stakeholders informed about the outcomes of their input. Sharing how their feedback has shaped decisions and improvements underscores the value of their involvement. This goes back to helping all members feel valued, heard, and respected. It also renews their commitment to your organization and their role in advancing institutional goals.

Maintain an Active Feedback Loop

Continuously refine your stakeholder involvement processes based on feedback to make the collaboration more effective and efficient. In other words, the model should be organic and evolve over time as needs change. The mission, vision, and objectives of stakeholder groups should be revisited periodically in order to gain maximum benefit.

Conclusion

Incorporating stakeholder involvement into higher education quality assurance is not just a best practice; it’s a necessity. By actively engaging stakeholders, colleges and universities can ensure their programs remain effective, relevant, and aligned with community needs. Moreover, documenting these interactions provides valuable evidence for accreditation, further enhancing institutional credibility.

###

About the Author: A higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com 

Top Photo Credit: Campaign Creators on Unsplash 

 

CBE for Educator Prep Programs

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
CBE

What is Competency-Based Education (CBE)?

Competency-based education (CBE) is quickly becoming accepted as an effective way to facilitate powerful, authentic learning at all levels. Sometimes referred to as personalized learning, mastery learning, or proficiency learning, students must demonstrate what they know and are able to do, rather than just put in “seat time” and complete a prescribed set of courses. However, designing a solid CBE program is not as simple as it sounds–it requires a great deal of thought, understanding, and know-how.

There are some institutions that implement the CBE model very effectively. For instance, at the higher education level Western Governors University and Capella University use it successfully.

This model supports students’ learning in a rich way. As a result, graduates are able to reach their goals and achieve their dreams. The CBE model enabled them to demonstrate what they know at their own pace because it helps educators to personalize learning experiences.

The CBE model will be a major player in the educational arena over the next two decades at the P-12 level as well as at the collegiate level.

Essential Tenets for Educator Preparation Programs to Consider

There are some essential thoughts to consider for educator preparation programs thinking about adopting the competency-based education (CBE) model, and I shared some of those tenets in a commentary published in the Journal of Competency-Based Education entitled, Implications for Educator Preparation Programs Considering Competency-Based Education. 

The model helps students demonstrate what they know and are able to do. This is done within the context of a set of well-articulated competencies.  Moreover, teachers measure student learning through high-quality assessments. It’s a great example of academic excellence.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com 

 

 

Top Graphic Credit: Deviantart.com

Tired of subs? Grow your own teachers. But do it with excellence.

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
teacher and students

Note: Updated on June 19, 2023

National Teacher Shortage

There has been a nationwide teacher shortage in math, science, English language learning, and special education for several years, and it will only get worse unless state departments of education, teacher training programs, and local school districts work together to pilot creative, out-of-the-box ideas. Gone are the days when individuals go into teaching just to “have something to fall back on” and to work the same hours as their children—teaching is a demanding profession, and the classroom can be a tough place to be. As a result of increasing demands placed on teachers, low pay and long hours, and little respect, teachers are leaving the profession in droves and choosing a different career path. And decreasing enrollment within schools of education confirms that many are not even considering entering the teaching field.

States’ Efforts to Fill Classrooms

California education officials recognize this critical teacher shortage, and they are committed to finding a solution.  In  Accelerating the Pathway to Initial Teacher Certification, I wrote about an initiative approved by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing that focuses on growing the number of qualified mathematics teachers.  At the district level, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is trying to shore up its supply of special education and other hard-to-find teachers through its STEP UP and Teach program. This program provides mentoring as well as financial support to qualified candidates, often those who are already employed in the district as paraprofessional and who have strong ties to the local community.

This “grow your own” approach is similar in many ways to other nationwide efforts such as the Educator Academy, formerly known as the Kansas City Teacher Residency project. Based on the premise that teachers are best trained on-site and under the careful mentoring of experienced teachers in real-life situation, such training is certainly workforce driven. Teacher candidates must demonstrate what they know and able to do on a daily basis. Admission requirements into programs such as the Educator Academy are strict, admitting only those candidates who demonstrate a strong propensity for long-term success as a caring, effective educator. This is as it should be—we want only the very best teaching our children and our grandchildren.

Preparation Quality and Teacher Efficacy

All these pilots share some things in common but there is still something they are missing—and that is a curriculum that is built by the best of the best—those educators and school leaders who have been recognized as high performing. Specifically, teacher candidates should be trained by those who have been highly successful in today’s classrooms and who understand how to meet the needs of students in 2023 and beyond.

Many higher education faculty members can talk theory but who have little teaching experience. Much of the time, their instruction will fall flat on its face. Likewise, a program built by those who haven’t seen the inside of a P-12 school in 20 years simply cannot prepare teachers for 21st Century schools. It’s just not realistic, and yet we see those programs training new teachers by the thousands in every state across our nation. As a result, we are licensing new teachers who discover they have come down with a case of, “What have I gotten myself into?” syndrome. Those teachers leave the classroom in droves, headed for less stressful jobs often with more pay. That’s why about half of all new teachers leave the profession within five years of obtaining their license.

Students deserve a fully qualified, caring, and competent teacher in every class. We’ve got to do a better job making sure this happens.

###

About the Author: A former higher education administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation, program development, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com 

Top Graphic Credit: www.educationcorner.com

As Your Higher Education Consultant, I Need to Know Where the Snakes Are.

Posted on by Roberta Ross-Fisher
consultant

Birth of a Snake Analogy

You may be wondering what being a higher education consultant has to do with snakes. Let me explain. Several years ago, my husband and I bought a small farm and decided to do a complete rehab on the old house. One weekend I was by myself and noticed something on the floor as I walked from one room to the other.

Lying very still in the hallway was a small snake, roughly 10-12 inches long. I love animals but for some reason reptiles have never been at the top of my list. I am particularly not interested in having them inside my home.

My 10-second assessment convinced me it wasn’t being aggressive, so I quickly ran for the broom and dustpan. Scooping that little critter up and carrying him a safe distance away from the house shot to the top of my priorities list, and I’m happy to report that the mission was successful.

Feeling proud of myself for taking care of this unexpected intruder in a relatively calm manner I went back in and tended to my tasks. However, after about an hour I walked into the bedroom and noticed something lying on the floor.  I couldn’t believe my eyes. How did it get back in? And why would it want to come back and scare me a second time?

Upon closer inspection I then learned it wasn’t the same snake. This one’s colors were a little richer, and it was a little shorter than the first. The realization that two snakes were able to get into my home (somehow, somewhere) did not bring me joy.

Having been successful in showing my first uninvited guest out, I did the same with the second. But by the time I got back in the house I found a third in the kitchen. By the time it was all said and done, I had come across at least seven snakes in my house that weekend. Thankfully, they weren’t poisonous nor were they aggressive. But they jarred me to my bones every time I came across one.

Making a very long story short, my husband and I discovered a hole just large enough for them to have squeezed through. Why those chose to make themselves at home, I’ll never know. But we packed every crack and crevice with enough steel wool and caulk to probably withstand gale force winds.

Snakes and Consultative Support

Now, you may be wondering:

What on earth does this have to do with being a higher education consultant? 

It actually fits perfectly. Let me explain:

Before I ever agree to take on a client in need of a higher education consultant, I always have a fairly lengthy conversation with them. We talk about where they currently are in a given project and what they are struggling with. I listen carefully to determine if their needs match up with my skill sets. In other words, I want to determine if I am the best person to help them achieve their goals. If I’m not, I tell them. We part ways and I wish them well.

However, if I do take on a client, I always tell them how important it is to have open, honest communication. We must be able to trust each other. For example, they need my reassurance that everything between us is confidential. It is–I never ever reveal who I work for unless I receive their express permission to share that information. But just as important, I need my clients to be honest with me and tell me exactly what they’re struggling with so ugly surprises don’t pop up later on.

In other words, I need to know where the snakes are.

Regardless of whether I’m working with a College of Education, an online learning department, or an entire institution, as a higher education consultant I need to know what keeps my clients up at night or what makes their stomachs feel queasy. I want to know where the bodies are buried (figuratively). If we agree to work together, I’ll find them eventually. But it would save us both a lot of time if I knew up front what they wouldn’t want to showcase to accrediting bodies, state regulatory agencies, and the like.

On the Path to Continuous Program Improvement

Once we lay all those problems areas out on the table, we can work together to address them.  As your higher education consultant, we can work together to get those gaps filled and shore up areas that the institution knows deep down should have been taken care of a long time ago.  I can support them in doing what’s necessary to ensure continuous program improvement. As long staff follow the plan, they should be able to handle any unpleasant surprises that may arise — without having to resort to steel wool and caulk.

###

About the Author: A former public school teacher and college administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, educator preparation and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).  She can be reached at: Roberta@globaleducationalconsulting.com

 

Top Graphic Credit: clipartspub.com