RPI is currently undergoing a self-evaluation process in order to seek reaccredidation from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. The group is an accrediting body for the schools and institutes in the Mid-Atlantic region and is one of six regional groups across the country that evaluate the quality of education provided by an institution. The Institute is due for reaccredidation in 2006, and has been in the midst of the process since November 2003.
Started in 1919, the organization has provided a self-evaluation procedure to help institutions guage themselves to help them understand what they have done right and what they need to improve upon. In order to keep accreditation, RPI has to go through a self-evaluation process every 10 years.
Since the last evaluation in 1996, the environment at RPI has changed greatly according to Don Siegel, chair of the economics department and the subcommittee on the standard of faculty. He explained that unlike before, when Middle States asked for general information on performance, they now seek hard data to evaluate the performance of RPI in a wide range of areas.
The overall process for reaccredidation entails a long evaluation—covering 14 aspects of RPI’s performance, all presented in a self-study report. The 14 standards are broken up into two subdivisions: the institutional context and educational effectiveness. These groups are broken down into the individual standards. In the institutional context there are standards for: mission, goal and objectives, planning, resource allocation, institutional renewal, institutional resources, leadership and governance, administration, integrity, and institutional assessment. The Educational Effectiveness subdivision is comprised of student admissions, student support system, faculty, educational offerings, general education, related educational activities, and assessment of student learning.
Each of these standards has its own report based “more on analytical data then on description,” said Don Steiner, chair of the overall Steering Committee. Steiner also explained that important data from the standard reports will show up in the self-evaluation report which Rensselaer must present to Middle States, along with the Standard reports in order to receive reaccredidation in February of 2006.
Siegel explained that it is a good thing for RPI to be evaluated, even though it does take a lot of time. He explained that reaccredidation is “like a seal of approval” for schools, and that the self-evaluation process will help the Institute see firsthand what aspects it needs to work on in order to provide better academic opportunities to the students.
Steiner explained that there are, “fully developed reports on each of the standards” and that the majority of the work on the self-study report will be done by the end of the semester; RPI is still going through the process of analyzing the 14 guidelines that will determine if the school becomes reaccredited. Each aspect entails a 30-40 page long report, and with 100 committee members analyzing these reports, it does take a long time for the process to be completed.
Steiner pointed out that as a part of the process, Jared L. Cohon, head of the evaluation team for Rensselaer’s reaccredidation and president of Carnegie Mellon University, visited RPI last Friday to see how the self-evaluation process was going.
