| Through the United States Department of Education, a governmental recognition body, and the Commission for Higher Education Accreditation, a non-profit/non-governmental recognition body, the AVMA is recognized as an official accrediting agency for colleges of veterinary medicine in the United States.
In conducting accreditation visits and assigning an accreditation status, the COE focuses only on the professional degree program in colleges of veterinary medicine. Accreditation of a college by the COE is important to the colleges because: it makes available certain federal student loan funds; gives the colleges an excellent opportunity to conduct a comprehensive self-study and to project program growth or change; provides recognition of a quality program; and assures the public that veterinary medical education in the United States is of the quality needed to meet the needs of society. The COE, without review by any other entity of the AVMA, judges the adequacy of the resources and organization of the college to meet its stated purposes, and that the educational outcomes are measured indicating that those purposes are being met on an ongoing basis.
ACCREDITATION PROCESS
ALL DISCUSSIONS, OBSERVATIONS AND DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITE VISIT AND ACCREDITATION DECISION ARE CONFIDENTIAL TO THE COE. ACCREDITATION INFORMATION CANNOT BE SHARED WITH ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP EXCEPT THE UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGE THROUGH THE OFFICIAL REPORT OF EVALUATION.
ACCREDITATION DECISIONS MADE BY THE COE CAN HAVE FAR-REACHING CONSEQUENCES FOR THE COLLEGE. CAREFUL AND THOUGHTFUL SITE VISIT ACTIVITIES AND ACCREDITATION DECISION ACTIVITIES MUST REFLECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROCESS.
Accreditation of a college of veterinary medicine is based upon compliance with the 11 standards of accreditation. These are: organization, finances, physical facilities and equipment, clinical resources, library and information resources, students, admission, faculty, curriculum, research programs, and outcomes assessment. The standards are dynamic, reflecting the changing educational needs of the veterinary profession, student populations, levels of scientific knowledge, health needs of animals and humans, and expectations of society.
Accreditation of veterinary colleges is voluntary, based upon a request from a college. The process begins when a college requests a site visit and submits a comprehensive self-study based upon COE guidelines. Scheduling and appointment of site team members are the responsibilities of the COE Evaluation Committee. Site visits are fact-finding missions wherein observations are made, data are gathered, and subjective judgments are made. This summarized information is presented to the full Council for discussion and assignment of an accreditation status. When an accreditation status is assigned, the college is notified of the outcome and the accreditation status for each college is published.
The site visit is an intensive four-day visit to the college used to verify the factual material presented in the self-study, clarify any questions regarding the college and its programs, assure appropriate learning environments exist, and promote educational improvement.
GETTING STARTED
The first objective is to be familiar with the information pertaining to site visits presented in the AVMA COE Manual by paying particular attention to the content and meaning of the 11 standards
Approximately three to six weeks before the scheduled site visit, each site team member will receive a self-study and supporting documentation directly from the college. These documents serve as a basis for the site visit. Each site team member must carefully read and study the materials received so that he/she will have a thorough understanding of the mission, structure, programs, curriculum, operation, and student learning outcomes of the college. It is important for each site team member to gain an overall understanding of the college before the site visit begins. It may be helpful to write questions regarding any specific area that is not fully understood. Approximately two weeks before the scheduled visit, each site team member will receive from the AVMA, Division of Education and Research (ER), a copy of the first draft of the evaluation report. This document is prepared from the college self-study each site team received earlier and is an attempt to summarize and document factual information in the self-study. The evaluation report will undergo many revisions before the final report is completed. Do not rely on the first evaluation report as your sole source of knowledge regarding a college. Each site team member is responsible for developing an in-depth knowledge of the college and is responsible for assisting the team in expanding the group's collective knowledge base through observations, questions, and interpretations.
THE SITE VISIT
At no time during the site visit will a member of the site team make any evaluative or prescriptive comments regarding the "state of the college" or the findings of the site team. Comments will be made to college and university officials at the appropriate time.
For a typical site visit schedule, please refer to the COE Manual. On site, each site team member must be satisfied that compliance with all standards is thoroughly investigated and discussed and that results (findings) are recorded. The Chairperson of the site visit team will provide special assignments to team members regarding one or more of the standards. Each member should pay special attention to these standards since he/she will be asked to write the teams conclusions for the evaluation report as it is revised in those areas. However, each team member is responsible for all standards. The evaluation should take into account that program diversity exists in colleges; the Council encourages diversity and educational innovation. The site team will not compare programs with other veterinary colleges. Each team member must judge only the college being visited in the context of its mission and educational objectives as presented in the self-study.
From the typical schedule, one will see that the site team tours facilities and meets with: administrators (both college and university); faculty (teaching, research, service); professional and graduate students; interns and residents; departmental and service (hospital, special program, etc.) representatives; specialized committees (research, curriculum, etc.); library and learning resources personnel; and faculty and students interested in confidential discussion. From these observations and discussions, and comparing these findings with the standards, the college mission and self-study, the team forms evaluation judgments to be reported to the COE.
During the tour of facilities each site team member should ask questions of college personnel regarding program and function; observe and make notes regarding specific areas, functions, and the adequacy of the facilities to meet the educational needs of the program. Remember that the facilities and equipment must meet the stated purposes of the program. It is not appropriate for individual team members to wander about by themselves or to separate themselves from the team because of interests in other areas or engage in social visits with faculty or staff. All members must be present during the entire tour.
At the beginning of each discussion-based meeting, the Chair of the team will make introductions and explain the purpose of the visit so that all in attendance will understand the process being undertaken and the desired outcome. All team members are expected to enter into discussions by asking good questions, but are not to become a discussant except for clarification of unclear points. Each site team member is to be a good listener, and record observations, and plan on being present during all discussions as appropriate to the schedule.
Questions asked and discussed during these sessions should be focused by the site team to gain additional information and insight about the programs of the college. Issues not related to the standards, and ultimately the outcome of the accreditation visit should not be discussed. A careful leader (and the team) will continually focus and refine the discussion to enhance understanding of the program. If discussion wanders, the team becomes less effective.
Each evening, after a long, intense, and tiring day, the site team members and AVMA staff will meet in executive session to further refine understanding of the programs and to revise the evaluation report. Be prepared for late night sessions, keeping in mind that your input is highly valued.
STANDARD INTERPRETATION
Based upon individual knowledge, professional interests, and capabilities of each team member, the individuals and the collective site team are expected to make value judgments regarding compliance with the standards at each college. The team judges total compliance, substantial compliance, or non-compliance for each accreditation standard. Compliance with some of the standards can be verified with data provided by the college. Others will be judged through subjective means only. The Council relies on the experience of the team members to make judgments based on their expertise with the application of reason and reality. The most important items dealt with are the colleges' ability to provide the educational program within the context of its mission, current resources, and societal needs; and the sustainability of the educational program.
The site visit is a point-in-time observation ("still photograph") of a dynamic process representing current conditions in the college. Be careful not to evaluate plans, unfinished renovations or structures, projected equipment purchases, desired program changes, and other non-existing "dreams." These items can be noted, but should not be used to make your assessments of compliance. This understanding should not eliminate entrepreneurial efforts that might improve the quality of education, research, or service to the profession, but must be evaluated based upon the mission of the college, the resources available, and the projected student learning outcomes.
Special emphasis is placed upon gathering information and data related to student learning outcomes. A college must have an ongoing process to collect, summarize and analyze student learning outcome data and must use the findings to improve student education. Examples of how student outcomes were used to improve educational quality of the program should be discussed with the college administration.
EVALUATING THE PROGRAM BASED ON THE ELEVEN STANDARDS
Examples of evaluation means: |
| A videotape illustrating interpretation of the 11 standards for accreditation should have been viewed. This video
was made during the fall COE meeting wherein two hours are devoted to training (retraining) all COE members regarding the site visit and the interpretation of the standards. The chair of the site team and the AVMA staff member will answer questions that may arise.
CONCLUDING THE VISIT
As the days pass, site members will develop a clear sense of the college's ability to comply with the standards and its ability to sustain the program within the resources identified. Many of your thoughts will be condensed and entered into the draft of the evaluation report executive sessions of the site team. During the last team executive sessions, the Chair will begin to formulate recommendations to be verbally presented to the dean of the college (and his/her designated group) and the president of the university (and his/her designated group). It is important that there is site team consensus with these recommendations. At these two final meetings the site team Chair will verbally present the finding of the team. Other team members should not speak until the report is complete, or unless the Chair, Dean, or President asks for additional information wherein a team member might make a substantial
contribution. No written report will be given to the college or university at this time.
WRITING THE REPORT OF EVALUATION
The final draft of the report of evaluation prepared by the site team should be concise, accurate, and defensible through written (self-study or addendums) or observed (site visit verification) evidence. Information in the report of evaluation draft must be understandable to the COE members and to the administration of the college and the university. Clarity is an absolute requirement.
AVMA staff to the COE provide a draft of the report of evaluation to each site team member prior to the scheduled site visit. This draft is a summary of the self-study addressing each standard. The draft is a working document. The draft may be replaced in its entirety, accepted as it is written, or edited to reflect the findings of the site team. Each site team member is assigned one or more standards as lead writer/editor. Each element of the standard and material required in the self-study should be addressed in the draft. (Remember that the college must comply with the elements of the standard and the elements of the outline for the self-study report. For example, the Outcomes Assessment standard is a simple one-sentence statement. The college, however, must comply with each
element within the outline provided for the self-study preparation.)
There are three major elements to each draft of the report of evaluation. 1) Background: The background describes the factual finding of the site team. Specific facts and/or figures can be presented to describe elements of the program. Each part of the standard should be addressed. At the end of the background section, an assessment statement must be made using the compliance statement at the end of each standard in the self-study report section as a model. 2) Findings: The findings section is reserved for the COE to report the compliance of a college with the standard. Nothing should be entered into the Findings section. 3) Commentary: The Commentary section is reserved for commending the college and for quality endeavors or for pointing out challenges/weaknesses. If a commentary statement is made, there must be evidence presented in the Background section to verify the Commentary statement.
Each site team must provide a listing (no order of priority) of the strengths of the educational program. Further, the site team must formulate recommendations for the college. The recommendations will be noted as non-compliance or substantial compliance should an adverse decision be possible. Other recommendations are intended to assist the college in improving its educational program and carry no adverse consequences. The site team must reach consensus on the strengths and the recommendations for each college. Following the site visit, the Chair of the site team, assisted by the AVMA staff will modify the draft report of evaluation to ensure that all standards have been addressed adequately, paying particular attention to assure that statements made in the recommendations are matched with supporting narrative in the Background of the draft. This draft is sent to site team members for their final input and the Chair will make the necessary revisions. The approved draft is included in the agenda of the COE for its next meeting wherein the Council will assign accreditation status based upon the evidence provided in the draft evaluation report. The Council may make changes in the draft presented and a final report of evaluation will be prepared and mailed to the college dean and university president. The report or any part thereof is confidential and will not be made public except by the actions of the dean or president. The accreditation status of each college is published electronically immediately following each COE meeting.
ACCREDITATION DECISIONS
Council members read and review draft reports of evaluation (provided in the COE meeting agenda book) for each college being considered for accreditation and come to the meetings prepared to discuss the findings of the site team and/or seek additional information necessary to evaluate that college. A copy of the self-study for each college under consideration is provided at the meeting. The Chair of the site team, or his/her designee, presents an accurate summary of the draft report of evaluation, leads discussion, and provides the recommendation of the site team for each Standard. Evidence for each standard is presented and discussed separately, followed by a recommendation from the site team chair (or his/her designee) regarding the college's compliance with that
standard. COE members vote (a majority is required) on that recommendation. After compliance with all Standards has been verified/not verified, an individual voting in the majority regarding a specific standard may propose a motion for reconsideration of that Standard based on substantive reason(s). The Council may reconsider (majority vote required) that Standard with additional discussion and confirm its decision or, with supporting evidence, reverse its decision (majority vote required). When Standard 11, Outcomes Assessment, is considered, the Council votes to approve or disapprove the colleges' performance in advancing student achievement; and the college is notified in writing of the assessment.
At the conclusion of review of all the standards and upon recommendation of the site team Chair, the accreditation status and the assigned time for that status is determined by majority vote of the Council; or by majority vote, the Council cites the college for substantial compliance or noncompliance with a Standard(s). If substantial compliance with a Standard(s) is assigned, the Council proposes a remedy for the deficiency and sets a time line for the college to come into compliance. Special notation is made in the recommendation section of the final report of evaluation when a college is in substantial compliance or non-compliance with a standard(s). Should a college be non-compliant with a standard, the college must be placed on limited accreditation for a period not to exceed two years but the COE does not prescribe what the college must do to come into compliance). Other recommendations are
suggestions for improvement of the educational program. Staff prepares a letter for the college that accompanies the final report of evaluation conveying the accreditation status, length of time a given status is assigned, and any special instructions (for example, substantial compliance instructions).
The same process used for accreditation is used for a letter of reasonable assurance. Should accreditation status be lowered, or a letter of reasonable assurance denied, or another adverse accreditation action taken for a specific college, the college is notified in writing of the reasons for the action and reminded of the appeal process.
DO'S AND DO NOT'S FOR A SITE VISIT |
|
Remember that the objectives of accreditation include: verifying that an institution or program meets established standards; assisting prospective students in identifying acceptable institutions; creating goals for self-improvement of weaker programs and stimulating a general raising of standards amount educational institution; and involving the faculty and appropriate staff comprehensively in institutional evaluation and planning;
Keep a positive attitude and not offer negative feedback or other criticism during the site visit;
Remember that all materials, discussions, deliberations, and reports of the site visit are confidential;
Refrain from discussing the "state of a college" with anyone other than site team members and appropriate AVMA staff;
Remain open-minded throughout the evaluation process;
Carefully study the materials contained in the college self-study to acquire a basic understanding of the college and its operation;
Be prepared for four and a half days of intense work with long evenings;
Participate in the discussions, both with college administration and personnel, and in the team deliberations;
Focus on and uphold the standards of accreditation;
Be alert at all times using all senses;
Be on time for all functions;
Be involved in all functions of the site visit;
Dress in corporate/professional attire for all site visit activities; men are asked to wear suits or coats and ties, and women are asked to wear suits, dresses, or pantsuits; and
Wear AVMA-COE identification badges at all times. |
= AVMA/SAVMA Members Only
