Preamble from Dr. Jim Brink, Vice Provost

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools reaffirmation of accreditation for Texas Tech University

Texas Tech University is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), the regional accrediting organization for eleven states in the southeastern United States, including Texas. Reaffirmation of accreditation is on a ten-year schedule, and Texas Tech University was last reaccredited in 1994. Normally, the university would be planning for a 2004 reaffirmation, but the process was delayed by one year at the request of SACS.

In 1998, SACS began the process of revising all aspects of its accreditation requirements, processes, policies, and procedures. That process culminated in December 2001, when SACS approved new Principles of Accreditation. The old reaccreditation process required a lengthy and detailed internal self-study. The self-study was the university's response to 462 "must" statements, or requirements that had to be met in order to qualify for reaccreditation. This process required the attention of eight to ten university committees for approximately one year. Following the completion of the self-study a 15-20 member committee visited campus to verify the findings of the self-study and to resolve questions raised by the document or left unanswered to the satisfaction of the SACS reviewers.

The new process is now called "reaffirmation" instead of reaccreditation. The new designation reflects the view that accreditation is an ongoing state, not a status that must be renewed each decade. Under the new rubric, it is understood that an accredited institution engages in constant and continual self-assessment. The self-assessment is goal oriented, and outcome based. This means that the institution has identified specific goals and established measures (outcomes) by which achievement of the goals may be assessed. In the case of Texas Tech University, the Strategic Plan is the principal component of this process.

Under the old reaccreditation process, there was an assumption that SACS performed a watch dog role, ensuring that its member institutions were fulfilling the accreditation requirements. Reaffirmation eliminates the self-study and the 462 "must" statements. In their place are 12 Core Requirements and 53 Comprehensive Standards, along with an additional 8 Federal Mandates. These requirements and standards are far more broadly stated than the former "must" statements. Also, the requirements for demonstrating compliance are far more flexible than was the case in the former process. Instead of a watch dog role, SACS now assumes that its members are capable of establishing goals and monitoring their progress toward achieving them. There is an emphasis on integrity. It is assumed that member institutions report honestly about the results of their self-assessment. The new reaffirmation process places far greater responsibility on the member institutions to demonstrate that they are in compliance with the Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Mandates.

In place of the self-study, reaffirmation requires that the university prepare two documents, a Certification of Compliance and a Quality Enhancement Plan. These documents are described below.

Certification of Compliance

The Certification of Compliance documents the university’s compliance with the Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Mandates. Evidence must be provided to support claims of compliance. In cases of partial or non-compliance, the university must submit a plan for achieving compliance. Compliance with all twelve of the Core Requirements is compulsory, and compliance with the Federal Mandates is a prerequisite to qualify for federal programs such as the Guaranteed Student Loan Program. Non-compliance or partial compliance with a Comprehensive Standard requires a statement of how the institution or unit plans to come into full compliance.

Most of the information required for the Certification of Compliance will be submitted in electronic form (i.e., on-line). Most of the Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards apply to the university in general, and compliance will be documented by referring to the University or Board of Regents' O.P. Manuals, university catalogs, and other existing sources. However, in a few cases responses are called for from various units of the university such as departments, colleges, centers, institutes, programs, and support services. This applies especially to provision of faculty credentials and information relating to assessment of programs at all levels. As noted above, assessment must be goal oriented and outcome based.

The deadline for completion of the Certification of Compliance is August 15, 2004. Texas Tech University’s Certification of Compliance will be evaluated between November 8-10, 2004 by an off-site committee, along with others from Level 6 institutions (research universities) that are undergoing reaffirmation in the 2005 cycle. The results of the off-site committee review will be conveyed to the university shortly after the committee submits its report. This will allow time for any questions that may have been raised in the Certification of Compliance to be addressed before the on-site committee comes to campus in the spring of 2005.

Quality Enhancement Plan

Core Requirement 12 calls for the university to prepare a Quality Enhancement Plan. The QEP is focused on improving some aspect of the educational component of the institution that enhances the quality of student learning. It represents a commitment on the part of the institution to identify an area for improvement, to develop a plan to meet specific, measurable goals, and to engage in ongoing assessment of progress toward completion of the plan. The university must submit an impact report five years following the initiation of the QEP in which it demonstrates the impact of the QEP on student learning, as defined in the plan. Therefore, it is advisable that the QEP be designed to produce measurable results within that time frame.

The QEP should be broad-based, impacting as many units of the university as possible, including both academic and support components. Effort should be made to engage as many stakeholder groups as possible in the selection of the plan focus and its implementation. The first job of the QEP Committee will be to devise a plan for soliciting input from such groups as students, faculty, administration, staff, alumni, and other interested individuals and groups. The QEP focus may be a currently identified component of the Strategic Plan, or it may be a new emphasis that has not previously been identified (in which case, it would be added to the Strategic Plan). Whatever focus is finally selected, it should be capable of successful implementation within the limits of the disposable resources of the university.

The QEP deadline is six weeks before the on-site visit (first week of February 2005 at the earliest). The plan is restricted to 75 pages of text with 25 pages of supporting documentation.

The On-Site Committee

An on-site committee will visit Texas Tech University for three days between March 14 and April 29, 2005. The primary role of the on-site committee is to evaluate the acceptability of the QEP, to advise the university on ways to improve the QEP, and to follow up on any remaining questions relating to compliance with the Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards. The committee will be made up of six or more members, two of whom will be specialists in the QEP theme selected by the university. The other members of the on-site committee will be selected by SACS, also with an emphasis on people who are qualified to comment on the QEP.

Both the off-site and on-site committees will submit reports to SACS that evaluate the university's level of compliance with the reaffirmation standards. The final determination of reaffirmation will be announced at the SACS annual meeting in December 2005.