Dean's Update, December 20, 2013

AACSB Report Sent to Peer Review Team

Our Maintenance of Accreditation Fifth Year Report has been sent to (and received by) the Peer Review Team (PRT) of Ronald Shiffler, Dean at Queen’s College; Patrick Shannon, Dean at Boise State University; and Norman Wright, Dean at Utah Valley University. It has also been received by AACSB offices in Tampa, Florida. In addition to the 48-page report, appendices totally 346 pages were also sent. You can review this material by clicking on the following link (password aacsb): Robert Chi, Associate Dean for Accreditation, deserves a huge thank you for preparing the report on time, as do Jay Grosflam and Nathan Chi, who were instrumental in developing the tables, charts, and appendices. Significant effort was required to produce this report, and Robert, Jay, and Nathan did great work; Omer Benli and David Horne added valuable information about student success, graduate programs, and assessment. James Coari was very helpful in editing an early version of the report. Next, we will prepare for the PRT’s visit from February 16 to February 18, 2014.

A few words on the review process: the PRT will arrive on Sunday, February 16; conduct their review on Monday, February 17; write their preliminary report Monday evening; and present their recommendation to the Provost on Tuesday morning, February 18. The PRT will be reviewing and discussing our documents prior to the visit, and Robert and I anticipate that the PRT will send us questions in January that we will answer before they come to campus. Within 10 days of providing the preliminary report, the PRT will submit its final Maintenance Review Visit Report to us and the Maintenance of Accreditation Committee (MAC) chair.

Within ten days of receipt of the report, we can send the PRT and MAC chair any comments and corrections related to factual information noted in the report. Two members of MAC will serve as a liaison and a reader between the visit team and the committee. The liaison’s role is to lead discussions concerning the institution at accreditation meetings. Prior to the MAC meetings, the liaison and reader thoroughly review the reports. The MAC will review the report and our response (if any) at its next scheduled meeting, probably in late March. The decision of the MAC is passed on to the AACSB Board of Trustees for final ratification.

The PRT can recommend reaccreditation, a sixth-year review on specific issues, or a continuing review if significant deficiencies are found; the MAC and Board of Trustees may affirm MAC decisions or remand them back to the appropriate committee for further action. I feel that reaccreditation is appropriate; after reviewing our report, I believe you will also.