ACCJC Standards Review Update – December 13, 2022
|Chancellors, Superintendents, Presidents, and Accreditation Liaison Officers of ACCJC Member Institutions; Other Interested Parties|
|Mac Powell, President MP|
|Subject:||Standards Review Update|
Standards Update and Next Steps
ACCJC Staff and the Standards Review Leadership Team are sharing with the field the current 2024 Draft Accreditation Standards that will be presented to the Commission for first reading at the January Commission Meeting.
To date, ACCJC has received comments through the comment form on the ACCJC website and through in-person and virtual Town Hall listening sessions conducted throughout the region. The comments have been extremely helpful as ACCJC Staff and the Standards Review Leadership Team continue to refine the Standards and the checklists that will support the work of our institutions.
The documents shared below include the Draft 2024 Accreditation Standards and the currently proposed review criteria. A “redline” (i.e., tracked changes) version of each document is also included to help share the iterative nature of the process and the changes made since the initial draft was presented to the community in September.
Draft 2024 Accreditation Standards
Draft 2024 Accreditation Standards with Draft Review Criteria and Suggestions for Evidence
I want to thank everyone who has brought this initiative to its current state: ACCJC Vice President Catherine Webb, the Standards Review Leadership Team, ACCJC Staff, the 85 writers and readers who participated in drafts over the past two years, and all of the community members who provided input and support. These Standards will continue to be revised based on Commission direction and continued community input, and we invite you to submit your feedback via the comment form on our website. We anticipate a second reading and adoption by the Commission at its June 2023 meeting.
Accreditation Review Cycle
In addition to the Accreditation Standards themselves, in a recent meeting with stakeholders, a member CEO asked if ACCJC had considered going to a 10-year review cycle. As you may know, a 7-year cycle length is specific to the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities and ACCJC. Most other accreditors have moved to longer periods with interim reports and monitoring. After consulting with the ACCJC Staff, the Standards Review Leadership Team, and the Executive Committee of the Commission, we are recommending to the Commission that the ACCJC cycle of accreditation be extended to 8 years, leaving the Midterm report where it is in the cycle, and providing institutions another year between that report and the submission of their ISER. The Annual Report and Annual Fiscal Report would also remain in place as tools of ongoing monitoring, and the Quality Focus Essay would be eliminated for institutions adopting the 2024 Accreditation Standards.
ACCJC Staff and the Standards Review Leadership Team are recommending a two-year “pilot” period beginning immediately upon the 2024 Accreditation Standard’s adoption, during which institutions can select the 2014 or 2024 Accreditation Standards to use in the development of their ISER and evaluation by peers and the Commission. Institutions that choose to pilot the 2024 Accreditation Standards will be immediately placed on the proposed 8-year cycle. In order to balance out the seasonal work of the Commission, institutions whose last review was under the 2014 Standards and whose next review is scheduled to take place after 2025 could be assigned a new extended review date based upon criteria established after the pilot institutions have been identified.
On behalf of everyone on the ACCJC Staff, I want to thank you for your support of the peer review process.