Return to Washburn Accreditation Home Page
Washburn University Institutional Self-Study Plan
August 19, 1996
Self-Study Steering Committee
Rebecca Bostian, Director, Mabee Library
Sheldon Cohen, Executive Director for Planning
Jack Decker, Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences
Meredith Kidd, Dean of Students and Chief Student Affairs Officer
Louis E. Mosiman, Vice President for Administration and Treasurer
Laura Stephenson, Associate Professor of Psychology
Ron Wasserstein (coordinator), Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs
Table of Contents of Self-Study Plan
Page
Self-Study Time Line
Proposed Table of Contents for Self-Study Report
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 The General Institutional Requirements
Chapter 3 Criterion One
Chapter 4 Criterion Two
Chapter 5 Criterion Three
Chapter 6 Criterion Four
Chapter 7 Criterion Five
Chapter 8 Federal Compliance Issues
Chapter 9 Summary
Groups Involved in the Self-Study and Their Assignments
Self-Study and Accreditation Process Time Line
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter 1 chair: Ron Wasserstein, Self-Study Coordinator
Chapter Outline
A. Purposes of and Audiences for this Self-Study Report
B. Organization of this Report
C. The Self-Study Process
D. A Brief Profile of WU
E. Washburn's Accreditation History
F. Institutional Response to Previous NCA Team Report
G. Changes and Significant Developments Since the Previous Comprehensive Evaluation
Responsibility for preparing reports needed for this chapter:
Sections A,B,C,E,F: Ron Wasserstein, Asst. VPAA, Self-Study Coordinator
Sections D and G: Sheldon Cohen, Exec. Dir. for Planning
Target date for the completion of the draft of chapter 1 (except for the section on the self-study
process) is October 15.
Chapter 2
The General Institutional Requirements (GIRs)
Chapter 2 chair: Ron Wasserstein, Self-Study Coordinator
Chapter Outline
A. Mission, Authorization and Governance (GIRs 1-8)
B. Faculty and Educational Programs (GIRs 9-18)
C. Finances and Public Information (GIRs 19-24)
Responsibilities
The Self-Study Steering Committee will take responsibility for this chapter. If the committee finds any problems or concerns with any GIR, these will be referred to an appropriate self-study sub-committee. While the committee will work together in evaluating the GIRs, the following steering committee members will serve as section coordinators:
Section A: Sheldon Cohen, Executive Director for Planning
Section B: Jack Decker, Assoc. Dean, CAS
Section C: Louis E. Mosiman, VP for Admin. & Treasurer
The section coordinators will work with the groups or individuals listed below to obtain the
documentation necessary to show that specified GIRs are met. In addition to written remarks,
this documentation will include either copies of appropriate University and/or external documents
or references to where these documents are found; for example, it may be sufficient to reference a
specific section of the University Faculty Handbook or the By-Laws rather than including a copy
of all or portions of these documents. Target date for completion of the draft of chaper 2 is
October 15, 1996.
Section A: Mission, Authorization and Governance
GIR Coordinator consults with
1-2 Planning Office
3-8 University Counsel
Section B: Faculty and Educational Programs
GIR Coordinator consults with
9-10 VPAA
11 VPAA, University Council
12-15 VPAA
16 General Ed Committee
17 Dean of Enrollment Management
18 VPAA, CSAO, Directors of Academic Support Areas
Section C: Finances and Public Information
GIR Coordinator consults with
19-21,24 Appropriate areas reporting to VPAT
22-23 VPAA, Catalog Editor, University Relations
Chapter 3
Criterion One: The institution has clear and publicly stated purposes consistent with its mission
and appropriate to an institution of higher education.
Chapter 3 (Criterion One) chair(2): Sheldon Cohen, Executive Director for Planning
Chapter Outline
Section Question(s) to be answered
B.(3) What are the purposes of Washburn University?
C. What are the processes by which we develop our purposes? To what extent are our constituencies involved in their development?
D. How well understood are the University's mission and purposes by students, faculty, administration and staff, the Board of Regents, city and state government, alumni and the general public? To what extent do these groups "buy into" the mission and purposes?
E. What are the means by which we evaluate our effectiveness in meeting these purposes?
F. What steps have we taken to insure freedom of inquiry for faculty and students?
G. How does the University demonstrate its commitment to excellence
in the teaching we provide to and the learning we expect from students?
The Criterion One chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups
B,C,E. Planning Office, Senior Staff
D. Washburn Student Association, VPAA, VPAT, University Relations, Alumni Association
F. University Legal Counsel, VPAA
G. Academic Deans, Directors of academic support areas, department
chairs, academic unit
governance bodies(4), University Council
Chapter 4
Criterion Two: The institution has effectively organized the human, financial and physical
resources necessary to accomplish its purposes.
Chapter 4 (Criterion Two) chair: Louis E. Mosiman, Vice President for Administration
Chapter Outline
Section Question(s) to be answered
B. How effectively has Washburn organized the human resources necessary to accomplish its purposes?
How effective are the University's administrative personnel in exercising appropriate responsibility for the institutional activities assigned to them? Are administrative personnel well-qualified for the positions in which they serve? Is the number of administrative and other non-faculty personnel appropriate for our institution, and are they distributed appropriately within the institution?
Are our administrative structures, procedures and policies well-defined, well-understood and efficient?
Does the Board of Regents operate in accordance with stated policy and provide the appropriate leadership to the University?
Is the faculty-administration shared governance system organized appropriately, and does it operate effectively?
Do we have appropriately qualified faculty in sufficient numbers to effectively operate our academic programs?
C How effectively has Washburn organized the financial resources necessary to accomplish its purposes?
Do our financial expenditure patterns match well with our stated purposes, and exhibit a commitment to provide the environment and the human resources necessary for effective teaching and learning?
Are the mechanisms by which financial decisions are made appropriate and effective? Are they sufficiently inclusive?
What are the principal financial constraints faced by the University? What problems will the University face as a result, and what are the long-term strategies for operating within these constraints?
D. How effectively has Washburn organized the physical resources necessary to accomplish its purposes?
Are academic resources and equipment adequate to support the University's purposes?
Is the physical plant sufficient and is it adequately maintained so as to provide an environment
that supports teaching and learning? What steps are taken to insure that students are provided a
safe and healthy environment?
The Criterion Two chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups [B
B. Senior Staff, Board of Regents, Academic Deans and Department Chairs, Personnel Office, academic unit governing bodies, University Council, Directors of Academic Support Areas
C. Treasurer's Office, Senior Staff, Budget Committee, academic unit governing bodies, University Council, Washburn Endowment Association, RPPC
D. Director of Physical Plant, Libraries,Director of Administrative
Computer Center, Directors of
Academic Support Areas, Electronic Technology Committee, academic unit governing bodies,
University Council
Chapter 5
Criterion Three: The institution is accomplishing its educational and other purposes.
Chapter 5 (Criterion Three) chair: Laura Stephenson, Associate Professor of Psychology
Chapter Outline
Section Question(s) to be answered
B. How is the University progressing in the implementation of its Assessment Plan?
How successful is the Program Review process in effecting departmental or institutional change?
What are the purposes of general education at Washburn University, and how well are we meeting those purposes?
To what extent is the University meeting its purposes as stated in chapter 1? How is the measurement of the "institutional outcomes" affecting the decision-making process?
Does our assessment process document that students (1)have proficiency in skills and competencies essential for all college-educated adults, (2) complete an identifiable and coherent undergraduate level general education component and (3) master the level of knowledge appropriate to the degree attained?
C. How does the University insure quality in its academic programs?
Are courses of study clearly defined, coherent and intellectually rigorous? What steps must new programs go through to insure they have these characteristics?
Do we have programs that include courses and/or activities whose purpose is to stimulate the examination and understanding of personal, social and civic values? Where appropriate, do programs require or encourage the use of scholarship and/or participation in research? Where appropriate, do programs require or encourage intellectual interaction between faculty and student and between student and student?
How is teaching effectiveness measured? Are programs and courses characterized by effective teaching?
What is the University doing to provide professional development opportunities for faculty, staff and administrators?
Do student and academic support services effectively support academic programs?
How does staff and faculty service contribute to institutional effectiveness?
Does the University follow commonly accepted practice in the maintenance of student records?
D. Are the University's non-credit continuing education programs meeting the needs of the community?
How are community needs being assessed?
How does the community regard these programs?
Do the programs fit with the University's mission and purposes?
How is quality insured in these programs?
E. How effectively is the University accomplishing its other purposes?
Is the University providing appropriate service to and involvement with the local community? How effectively is the University serving as a cultural center for the community?
Is the University providing appropriate service to and involvement with the higher education community?
Is the type, amount and quality of research being performed appropriate for our institution?
(continued on next page)
The Criterion Three chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups
B. academic deans and department chairpersons, academic unit governance bodies, General Education Committee, Assessment Committee(5), Program Review Committee, Planning Office
C. University Council, academic deans and department chairpersons, academic unit governance bodies, VPAA, Faculty Development Committee, Chief Student Affairs Officer, Washburn Student Association, University Registrar's Office, Planning Office, Directors of Academic Support Areas
D. Division of Continuing Education
E. Planning Office, VPAA, Research Committee
Chapter 6
Criterion Four: The institution can continue to accomplish its purposes and strengthen its
educational effectiveness.
Chapter 6 (Criterion Four) chair: Jack Decker, Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
Chapter Outline
Section Question(s) to be answered
B. Does the University's resource base suggest that it can continue to accomplish its purposes and strengthen its educational effectiveness?
Are resources organized and allocated to support strengthening educational effectiveness?
What are the chief resource threats to the University, and how does the institution plan to face them?
Are majors changes in the funding base (for example, state affiliation, sales tax, mill levy increases) necessary? If so, how will the University proceed toward making those changes?
C. Does the University's organizational structure and function suggest that it can continue to accomplish its purposes and strengthen its educational effectiveness?
How effective is the University's planning process?
Are the University's decision-making processes and governance structures capable of responding quickly and effectively to anticipated or unanticipated challenges to the institution?
Is the University's assessment effort sustainable? Does it have the support of the Board of
Regents and the senior administration? Is it adequately funded? Do the results of assessment
influence academic planning or the budget process?
The Criterion Four chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups
B. Planning Office, Budget Committee, Senior Staff, University Council, Washburn Endowment Association, RPPC
C. Planning Office, Senior Staff, Board of Regents, University
Council, academic deans,
administrative area heads, Assessment Committee, Budget Committee, RPPC
Chapter 7
Criterion Five: The institution demonstrates integrity in its practices and relationships.
Chapter 7 (Criterion Five) chair: Rebecca Bostian, Director, Mabee Library
Chapter Outline
Section Question(s) to be answered
B. How accurately does the University communicate its policies and procedures to its various constituencies?
Do the University Catalog, class schedules, Student Handbook, viewbook and all other documents related to student recruitment provide appropriate and accurate information to students and prospective students regarding academic policies and curricula?
Do the Faculty Handbook and Business and Financial Affairs Handbook provide appropriate and accurate information to faculty, staff and administration regarding University policies and procedures?
By what methods does the University insure accuracy and integrity in publications and advertisements intended for external publics (for example, alumni)?
C. How consistent with stated policies and procedures are the practices of the University?
Are academic and financial transactions with students carried out in accordance with written policies and procedures? Are exceptions granted in an equitable and appropriate manner?
Does the University consistently carry out its obligations to personnel according to written policies and procedures?
D. How well does the University demonstrate its integrity in its operation and practices?
What steps are taken to avoid conflict of interest at all levels?
Is full disclosure practiced in all of the University's dealings? Are open meetings laws strictly adhered to? Are minutes of meetings made available to appropriate publics? Are relationships with external entities (such as the Washburn Endowment Association) completely, accurately and clearly set forth in publicly available documents?
How well does the University maintain an environment that supports sensitivity to diverse individuals and groups?
Does the University have in place, and properly monitor, policies regarding equity of treatment
and access, nondiscrimination and affirmative action?
The Criterion Five chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups
B. VP-Academic Affairs, VP-Administration and Treasurer, Chief Student Affairs Officer, University Relations Director, Alumni Director, Dean of Enrollment Management, Washburn Student Association, University Council, academic unit governance bodies, academic deans, department chairs, administrative area heads, University Legal Counsel, University Registrar, Personnel Office, Athletics Dept.
C. VP-Academic Affairs, VP-Administration and Treasurer, Chief Student Affairs Officer, Dean of Enrollment Management, Washburn Student Association, University Council, academic unit [Bgovernance bodies, academic deans, department chairs, administrative area heads, University Legal Counsel, University Registrar, Personnel Office, Athletics Dept.
D. VP-Academic Affairs, VP-Administration and Treasurer, Washburn
Student Association,
University Council, academic unit governance bodies, University Legal Counsel, Affirmative
Action Director, Multicultural Affairs Office, University Registrar,
Athletics Dept.
Chapter 8
Federal Compliance Issues
Chapter 8 chair: Meredith Kidd, Dean of Students and Chief Student Affairs Officer
Chapter Outline
Section Issue
B. Credits, Program Length and Tuition
In this section the University will demonstrate that its practices regarding program length and the awarding of credit are common to comparable accredited institutions of higher education. Further, it will justify program-specific tuition in terms of program cost, length and objectives.
C. Institutional Compliance with the Higher Education Reauthorization Act
Materials pertinent to documenting the University's compliance with Title IV requirements will be provided in this section.
D. Institution's Advertising and Recruitment Materials(6)
(This section will be excerpted from Chapter 7)
E. Public Notification of Comprehensive Evaluation Visit
The University will demonstrate in this section that it has complied with Commission procedures
for publicizing the comprehensive evaluation.
The Criterion Five chair will call upon at least the following groups to answer these questions:
Section Groups
B. VPAA, VPAT, University Legal Counsel
C. VPAT, Financial Aid Office
D. (see footnote 6)
E. University Relations Office, Self-Study Coordinator
Chapter 9
Summary
Chapter 9 chair: Ron Wasserstein, Self-Study Coordinator
Groups Involved in the Self-Study and Their Assignments
This section illustrates the breadth of involvement in the self-study. Each group assigned a self-study task will receive a complete set of the self-study questions for all criteria, with its
responsibilities highlighted. However, every self-study group will be given freedom to respond to
any self-study question.
Academic Support Area Directors(7) GIR 18; Chapters 3G,4B,4D,5C
Administrative Area Heads(8) Chapters 5B,6C,7B,7C
Affirmative Action Officer Chapter 7D
Alumni Association Chapters 3D,7B
Assessment Committee Chapters 5B,6B,6C
Athletics Dept. Chapters 7B,7C,7D
Board of Regents Chapters 4B,6C
Budget Committee Chapters 4C,6B,6C
Catalog Editor GIRs 22,23
Chief Student Affairs Officer Chapter 2B,5C,7B,7C
Continuing Education Division Chapter 5D
Deans of major academic units Chapters 3G,4B,5B,5C,6B,6C,7B,7C
Dean of Enrollment Management GIR 17; Chapters 7B,7C
Department Chairs Chapters 3G,4B,5B,5C,7B,7C
Electronic Technology Committee Chapter 4D
Faculty Development Committee Chapter 5C
Financial Aid Office Chapter 8C
General Education Committee GIR 16; Chapter 5B
Governance bodies of acad. units Chapters 3G,4B,4C,4D,5B,5C,7B,7C,7D
Multicultural Affairs Office Chapter 7D
Personnel Office Chapters 4B,7B,7C
Physical Plant Director Chapter 4D
Planning Office GIRs 1-2; Chapters 1D,1G,3B,3C,3E,5B,5C,5E,6B,6C
Program Review Committee Chapter 5B
Research Committee Chapter 5E
Registrar's Office Chapters 5C,7B,7C,7D
RPPC Chapters 4C,6B,6C
Self-Study Coordinator Chapters 1ABCEF, 9
Senior Staff Chapters 3B,3C,3E,4B,4C,6B,5C
University Council GIR 11; Chapters 3G,4B,4C,4D,5C,6B,6C,7B,7C,7D
University Legal Counsel GIRs 3-8; Chapters 3F,7B,7C,7D,8B
University Relations Office GIRs 22, 23; Chapters 3D,7B,8E
VP-Academic Affairs GIRs 9-15, 18, 22, 23; Chapters 3D,3F,5C,5E, 7B,7C,7D,8B
VP-Administration and Treasurer GIRs 19-21, 24; Chapters 3D,4C,7B,7C,7D,8B,8C
Washburn Student Association Chapters 3D, 5C,7B,7C,7D
Washburn Endowment Association Chapter 4C,6B
1. "Sub-committees" of the Self-Study Steering Committee are any group assigned a self-study task. The Self-Study Steering Committee does not intend to create new committees, preferring to work with existing structures. These groups may chose to form special or ad hoc committees for the purpose of self-study if they wish.
2. Each member of the Self-Study Steering Committee is responsible for coordinating the collection of data for at least one chapter of the Self-Study Report. Chapter chairpersons are not required to write the chapters, but to prepare the information needed to write the chapter. The Self-Study Coordinator shares joint responsibility with the chair for this and every other chapter, and will write the draft of the Self-Study Report. After revisions are made in the draft, an editor will be employed to polish the final version.
3. In this and every chapter related to the criteria, Section A will be a brief summary of the strengths and weaknesses which are detailed in the remainder of the chapter.
4. "academic unit governance bodies" refers to the highest faculty governance group recognized by each of the five major academic units; for example, the College Faculty Council in the CAS
5. The Assessment Committee is being organized this fall. Assessment matters are currently being handled through the Planning Office.
6. The Chapter 8 chair will coordinate efforts with the Criterion 5 (Chapter 7) chair regarding these issues.
7. Includes Directors of the University Library, Academic Computer Center, Media Center, KTWU Channel 11, Mulvane Art Museum, Center for Learning and Academic Support Services (CLASS) and International Studies
8. refers to heads of administrative areas reporting to the Vice President for Administration and Treasurer