University of Nevada, Reno

Institutional Self-Study for Reaccreditation - First Draft

Executive Summary

March 1997

This document is an executive summary of the first public draft of the University of Nevada, Reno's Self-Study for Reaccreditation by the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges.

Institutional accreditation and the self-study that goes with it is required of every institution of higher education in the United States at least every ten years. Accreditation in this country is a peer review process, a very thorough report card prepared by expert evaluators from other colleges and universities. It is the means by which we assure faculty, students, and our constituents that the institution meets appropriate standards. The Self-Study portion of the reaccreditation process is viewed by the Northwest Association as, "...the most significant part of the accreditation process. The aim of the self-study is to understand, evaluate and improve -- not merely to defend what already exists. A well-conducted self-study should result in a renewed common effort within the institution to improve and consolidate the whole."

BACKGROUND

The University of Nevada, Reno Self-Study Steering Committee was convened in January 1996, with representation from across the campus. The Steering Committee's charge has been to oversee the extensive internal evaluation required prior to this fall's campus visit by a 16-member evaluation team from the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges. The committee's work - the results of extensive data gathering, analysis, and an open planning process - is now ready for campus review and comment in a first draft.

Three open campus forums have been scheduled during March to review each of the eleven draft standards. The forums will convene:

Standards I, II, III, and VIII

March 19 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. - Morrill Hall, Clark Room

Standards IV, VI, X, and XI

March 20 1 p.m. - 3 p.m. - JTSU Room 244

Standards V, VII, and IX

March 25 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. - JTSU Room 244

Each meeting will focus on particular topics. Comments on any standard are welcome at any meeting, however.

Preparing for accreditation is important work that has serious impact on and implication for the university. Recommendations contained in the last self-study for reaccreditation had a profound effect. We implemented the Core Curriculum, strengthened and revitalized the Honors Program. We initiated our writing and mathematics across the curriculum program and addressed the way in which the university approaches sponsored research, all based on recommendations contained in the 1988 self-study.

In the current self-study, some 150 specific recommendations are made. Many draw on the current version of the university's Academic Master Plan. Included are proposals and actions ranging from the somewhat routine to those that might well have a major effect on the university and the way we conduct ourselves as a campus community. What follows focuses only on the more important recommendations. For more detail on specific standards, we urge you to consult the full text of the document on the world-wide web:

http://www.unr.edu/sssc/index.html (or link from UNR faculty homepage)

It will also be on deposit in locations around campus: Faculty Senate Office, Getchell Library Reference Desk, and Medical Library.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The most dramatic of the recommendations in the self-study include:

Discuss establishment of a University College. This would be a university-wide structure, with a curricular and academic component, providing a way to address perplexing issues such as student advisement, retention, entrance into majors, and coherence of the freshman year. In the process of planning University College, determine what elements currently within Student Services belong in that new entity, as well as academic programs such as the Core Curriculum, the Honors Program, Freshmen Forums, University Seminars, Study Abroad Programs, and perhaps others (Standards V and IX).

Reorganize the central administration of the university in such a way as to give primacy to the chief academic officer - perhaps establishing a provost model - to insure that budget priorities and other decisions are made in the context of the Academic Master Plan and evaluative tools such as program review (Standard VIII).

Use university-wide plans (academic, physical, etc.) to set institutional priorities. Make assessment an integral part of planning and resource allocation. On-going faculty involvement in the budget acquisition and allocation processes should become standard (Standards VIII, I, and II).

To promote quality and efficiency, the University of Nevada, Reno assessment procedures should be refined and adequate resources provided, so that program strengths and weaknesses can be judged more systematically, with the assessment results being used in the planning and budget process. The impact of new initiatives on existing programs must be recognized (Standards I and II).

Continue to integrate electronic distance education as part of the university's educational offerings, but develop a policy about how many resources the university should commit to electronic delivery systems. If distance education is to become an integral part of the university's regular academic programs, it is appropriate to assess how such programs would best be administered, supported, and assessed (Standards IV and VI).

Engage the university's own legal counsel, distinct from UCCSN counsel (Standard VIII).

As appropriate, colleges and major programs should be held responsible for the recruitment, retention, and timely graduation of their students. Programs that focus more efforts on recruitment and retention should be supported in these efforts and rewarded for success (Standard V).

The allocation of faculty positions, space, and money is a common source of friction in the university. It is recommended that the potential conflict of priorities between research housed in independent and interdisciplinary centers and research housed in academic departments and colleges be subject to formal devised policies by the faculty and administration, in order to promote effective, robust growth of all such programs (Standard X).

The functions of Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School should not be separated until adequate levels of funding for the Graduate School are secured within the university budget (Standard XI).

The Graduate School should work to secure a state-funded budget to facilitate graduate education. It is further recommended the minimum annual stipend for graduate assistants be $12,000, or one half the minimum 12-month salary for Rank 1 instructors (Standard XI).

PROCEDURE

The work of the Self-Study Steering Committee is only partly completed. After the draft is reviewed in March, the Steering Committee will convene in April to prepare a second draft. That draft will be sent to the accreditation team, and will serve as the basis for the assessment of the university next fall. So your comments now are crucial. Additions, corrections, and comments from the university community as a whole are welcomed.

We want the draft document to be reviewed by the widest possible number of people. It is critical that your voice be heard, to tell the Self-Study Steering Committee what key areas it has missed, which recommendations are well off the mark, and which observations need bolstering. Please plan to attend one of the three open forums. If you are unable to attend, please e-mail your comments to the committee at: sscom@unr.edu. You can send written comments to the committee through its chair, Elizabeth Raymond, Mail Stop 064. The Self-Study office phone is ext. 1873. Please submit your responses by April 7.