Answering to Two Masters: Strategies for Designing a Self-Study Process When Both Professional and

Regional Accreditation Standards Exists on Campus

Roger J. Ward, EdD, JDAssociate Vice President, Academic Affairs

Accreditation Liaison Officer

Middle States Commission on Higher Education Annual ConferenceDecember 9, 2010

Presentation Roadmap• Provide a brief profile of the University of

Maryland, Baltimore• Discuss the accreditation reality on a

graduate and professional campus.• Frame the questions and challenges facing

the ALO at UMB.• Discuss what worked well in designing and

managing the self-study process.• Share lessons learned and how they inform

planning for future accreditation activities.

About UMB• Founding campus (1807) of the University System of Maryland.

• Located in Baltimore City.

• Enrollment: 5,577 Graduate and Professional Students.772 Undergraduate.

• Schools: Dentistry, Graduate, Law, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, and Social Work.

• Sponsored research exceeded $550 million in Fiscal Year 2010.

UMB’s Mission

The University of Maryland is the state's public academic health and law university devoted to professional and graduate education, research, patient care, and public service…UMB is committed to ensuring that the knowledge it generates provides maximum benefit to society, directly enhancing the community.

An ALO’s Dream vs. The Reality

The ideal we wish for1. Professional Standards

are similar and interchangeable

2. Accreditation cycles complement and are synchronized with each other

3. The university and the schools are focused on both set of standards

The reality we live with1. Regional and

professional standards or not fungible

2. Accreditation cycles clash and overlap

3. Schools are focused primarily, if not exclusively, on their accreditation

Getting a Handle on the Accreditation Cycle

Accrediting Body Last Accredited

Next Accreditation

UMB Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE)

2006 2016

Dentistry Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA)

2004 2011

Law American Bar Association (ABA) 2003 2010 - 2011

Medicine Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME)

2008 2015 - 2016

Nursing Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE)

2009 2014

Pharmacy American Council on Pharmacy Education (ACPE)

2006 2011 - 2012

Social Work Council on Social Work Educations (CSWE)

2008 TBD

Graduate Peer Reviewed Periodic Periodic

Questions to Consider

1. How does the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Academic Officer, and Accreditation Liaison Officer navigate this seemingly complicated accreditation maze?

2. Are there opportunities that can be exploited and economies of scale that can be achieved in designing the self-study process such that it benefits both the institution and the schools?

What Worked Well• ALO adopted a “community organizer”

approach to getting the schools into the sandbox.

• Found the “Influential Person (IP)” person in each school to partner with.– IP not necessarily the big dean– IP identified the “Reliable People (RP)”• RP not necessarily people with the titles

• Created work groups around the 14 standards.

What Worked Well

• Created an accreditation matrix.• Read the schools most recent self-study– Schools can be mysterious places and can

be reluctant to share information, especially if there are major dings in their accreditation report

• Tasked one person to pull the self-study report together in one voice– This more than just editing the work

groups’ reports.

Lessons Learned From the Last Self-Study Design

• Keep the president focused on the MSCHE accreditation all the time—don’t wait until a visit is pending.

• Capitalize on the “culture of accreditation” and expertise in the schools.

• Establish a standing “University Committee on Accreditation” which includes partners from each of the schools.

Lessons Learned From the Last Self-Study Design

• Build and maintain an accreditation matrix of standards.

• Insist that accreditation standards are considered when the university sets its strategic priorities in the strategic planning process.

MSCHE CODA ABA LCME CCNE ACPE CSWE

Mission and goals

1 1-1 301 ED-1 to ED-3

I 123

1.0

Resources 3 4.5 201 ER-4ER-11ER-12

II 27282930

3.5

Assessment 7 1-2 203 ED-46ED-47

IV 15 4.0

Student Leaning

14 2-92-23

302303

MS-31 to MS-37

IIII 1115

2.03.0

Questions & Comments

E-mail: rward005@umaryland.edu