Accreditation

Madison College's Open Pathway 10-year cycle:

Year 4 – Assurance Review: 2019-2020

The Madison College stakeholders along with the Impact Team and Writing Team submitted the Year 4 Assurance Argument in June 2020. In July 2020, the HLC Review Team provided their review (PDF) and confirmation (PDF) that the college "successfully completed its Year 4 Assurance Review with no recommended monitoring."

Years 5-9 – Quality Initiative: 2021-2025

Year 10 – Comprehensive Evaluation & Site Visit: 2025-2026

Madison College had participated in the Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) accreditation processes from 2005 to 2016. The institution worked to ensure that Madison College was committed to quality improvement and maintaining compliance with the HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation.

The processes involved for AQIP were:

• Strategy Forum
• Annual Updates
• Systems Portfolio and Appraisals
• Comprehensive Quality Review. 

Learn more by reviewing the Comprehensive Quality Review (CQR) report, the Systems Portfolios and the Systems Appraisal Reports:

Final CQR Report 
The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) conducted a Comprehensive Quality Review site visit in March, 2016.  The visit and this associated report are standard activities conducted by the HLC to ensure colleges and universities meet the HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation.

Below are copies of the reports filed with HLC prior to the HLC peer review site team visit in March 2016: 

2016 Systems Portfolio Addendum 
An updated report delivered to the Higher Learning Commission prior to its 2016 Comprehensive Quality Review (CQR) on-site visit.  The report is a result of HLC changing their AQIP Pathway from a 7 year cycle to an 8 year cycle; this report will not be repeated in the future. 

2016 Highlights Report 
This is a report that is provided to Higher Learning Commission prior to the Comprehensive Quality Review (CQR).  It is a brief highlight of actions, updates, or initiatives that illustrate principles of continuous quality improvements. 

2016 Multi-Campus Report 
An institution that operates multiple campuses in addition to the main campus must provide a review the branch campuses prior to the Comprehensive Quality Review (CQR).

2016 Federal Compliance Report 
This report assures the institution is compliant in meeting Title IV program responsibilities as well as meeting specific regulations enforced by the U.S. Department of Education.

COMPREHENSIVE QUALITY REVIEW REPORT

To
Madison Area Technical College
Madison, Wisconsin March 28-29, 2016

For
The Higher Learning Commission
A commission of the North Central Association

EVALUATION TEAM
Timothy Allwein, Associate Professor, Indiana Institute of Technology, Fort Wayne, Indiana 46803, Chair
John Gratton, President, New Mexico State University Carlsbad, Carlsbad, New Mexico 88220
Lisa Perez Miller, Vice President Student/Enrollment Management, Pratt Community College, Pratt, Kansas,67124
Jody Tomanek, Area Vice President for Academic Affairs, Mid-Plains Community Collge, North Platte, Nebraska 69101
JoAnn Simser, State Director Career & Technical Education--Retired, Minnesota State Colleges & Universities, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101

Contents
Background and Purpose of Visit
Compliance with Federal Requirements
Fulfillment of the Criteria for Accreditation
Commitment to Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)
Commitment to AQIP Pathway
Team Recommendation
Embedded Changes in Affiliation Status
Appendix A. Interactions with Constituents 30
Appendix B. Documents Reviewed
Appendix C. Federal Compliance Worksheet
Appendix Team Worksheet for Evaluating an Institution’s Program Length and Tuition, Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours
Appendix D: Multi-Campus Report(s) (if applicable)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF VISIT

1. Overview of CQR

   A Comprehensive Quality Review (CQR) is required during the final year of the AQIP Pathway cycle and may also occur in the fourth year based upon institutional request or Commission determination. The goals of the CQR are to:

   • Provide assurance that the institution is meeting Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation. (With respect to the optional mid-cycle CQR, alert the organization to areas that need attention prior to its next Reaffirmation of Accreditation. Such concerns may be signaled during the Systems Appraisal process in the third year of the cycle.)

   • Provide assurance that the institution is meeting the Federal Compliance Requirements (eighth year only).

   • Facilitate the institution’s continuing quality improvement commitment, confirming that a developing or established Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) culture and infrastructure exist that advances organizational maturity in relation to the AQIP Pathway Categories.

   • Verify any issues identified in Action Project Feedback Reports, Systems Appraisals or Commission actions.

   • Validate process level development and deployment as described in the Systems Portfolio.

   • Identify actions taken to minimize identified strategic issues and to alleviate potential accreditation issues.

   • Review CQI priorities and progress including how Action Projects are integrated into an institution’s overall performance improvement strategy.

   • Review distance and/or correspondence education delivery if applicable (eighth year only).

   • Evaluate distributed education (multiple campuses) if applicable (eighth year only).

   • Develop an initial recommendation regarding Pathway eligibility (eighth year only).

2. Purpose of Visit and Institutional Context

   The March 2016 multi-campus visit was to conduct a Comprehensive Quality Review of Madison Area Technical College (Madison College), Madison, Wisconsin. Since the passage of a $134 million referendum in 2010, Madison College has undertaken considerable construction projects, some of which have been completed, some currently under way, and others yet to begin. In 2013, the college experienced a change in its president. Due to the passage of 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 that significantly affected public sector labor unions, faculty and staff collective bargaining agreements over a wage, benefits, and working conditions at Madison College expired in March 2014.

   Subsequent annual collective bargaining agreements with faculty and staff covered only base wages and only permitted increases in base wages up to the level of inflation per the 2011 change in law. The law change, coupled with the age of college employees, resulted in many retirements and subsequent new hires.

3. Unique Aspects or Additions to the Visit

   Campuses visited included the main Truax campus along with campuses at Commercial Avenue (Madison), Portage, and Reedsburg. While the Higher Learning Commission regards the college’s Commercial Avenue operation to be a campus, the institution, itself, has indicated in the past that it has not meet the requirements for a campus based on concerns over its administration and programming. At the time of this report, the programmatic matter has been addressed by the college and it is currently addressing the administrative matter. The visiting team toured the Commercial Avenue facility and has included a multi-campus report for it in Appendix D.

4. Additional Locations or Branch Campuses Visited (if applicable)

   Members of the CQR team visited branch campuses: Commercial Avenue, JoAnn Simser; Portage, John Gratton, and; Reedsburg, Jody Tomanek.

   The HLC website states that Commercial Avenue is a campus and the Evaluation Summary Sheet lists Madison-Commercial Avenue Campus as part of the multi-campus visit. However, the Multi-Campus Evaluation Report submitted by the College states that "The Commercial Avenue campus is not considered a 'branch campus' by HLC." and that "The Commercial Avenue Campus does not have a separate administrative structure; it is an educational facility in the Metro Region that hosts specific program and course offerings."

5. Distance Delivery Reviewed

   Madison College offers online degrees in seven programs of study and also offers enhanced ITV courses. The branch campuses rely heavily on the ITV initiatives in order to provide needed courses. Also, the institution has initiated a substantial number of hybrid course in which Blackboard is employed to support face-to-face instruction. The college has initiated the use of Quality Matters to ensure the appropriate rigor and structure of its online courses, but this initiative is in its initial phases.

   Questions which arose centered on tutoring and advising for online students and the assistance provided to faculty in developing their online courses. The Portage Campus has initiated the use of Brain Fuse to provide tutoring assistance to online students.

   Perhaps, the main campus could benefit from a service such as Smarthinking and the use of an Instructional Designer would benefit the institution's faculty in their courses.

6. Notification Related to Third Party Comments

   The college posted all third party comments that were received. Copies of the third party comments were provided to the visiting team in advance of its visit and during the visit the comments were discussed in detail with Madison College representatives.

COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS

No compliance issues were identified by the visiting team during the visit. Madison Area Technical College meets the Higher Learning Commission’s requirements for federal compliance. No monitoring is recommended. Please see the Federal Compliance Worksheet for Review Panels and Evaluation Teams that is attached in Appendix C.

FULFILLMENT OF THE CRITERIA FOR ACCREDITATION

CRITERION ONE: MISSION. The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations.

Core Component 1A: The institution’s mission is broadly understood within the institution and guides its operations.

Subcomponent 1. The mission statement is developed through a process suited to the nature and culture of the institution and is adopted by the governing board.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s academic programs, student support services, and enrollment profile are consistent with its stated mission.

Subcomponent 3. The institution’s planning and budgeting priorities align with and support the mission.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• The 2013 AQIP Systems Portfolio describes (p.78) the means of communication used by Madison College. The media used to communicate the institution’s mission to its stakeholders include convocations, press releases, media blasts, and employee orientation, among other similar means.

• Madison College under took an initiative to develop new mission, vision, and values in October 2013. Through face-to-face and online sessions, 1,074 college stakeholders suggested themes for consideration that were prioritized through the participation of approximately 1,000 individuals. Ultimately, in January 2014, the District Board approved new mission, vision, and value statements for the college. With the input of over 130 members of the college community, the Strategic Planning Committee developed six strategic directives aligned with the new statements. Strategic Planning Committee progress is regularly communicated through a 3-times per week newsletter (Madison College Matters) and convocations. Additional mechanisms for reinforcing institutional mission include the college’s academic plan (IMPACT Initiative), student services’ plan Pillars of Promise, Cabinet Communication Plan—2014-15 and Beyond, and Return to Our Foundations 2015- 16 academic year theme.

• A task force was formed in the fall of 2015 to develop a framework clarifying logical relationships related to decision-making at the college. In an effort to guide managerial decision-making institution-wide, the framework emphasizes that the reasons for any given decision should be driven by institutional mission and the means for decision-making should be Interest-based Problem Solving (IBPS).

• PACE Survey (2014) results demonstrate statistically significant improvement in the realm of AQIP Category 6 Leading & Communicating. An internal survey indicating the degree to which stakeholders rely on Madison College Matters newsletter has led to a recent redesign of the newsletter. Comparatively, Madison College received the Higher Education Marketing Report’s Gold Award for its Madison College Matters newsletter that is the most frequently circulated newsletter among those in the Wisconsin Technical College System.

Core Component 1B: The mission is articulated publicly.

Subcomponent 1. The institution clearly articulates its mission through one or more public documents, such as statements of purpose, vision, values, goals, plans, or institutional priorities.

Subcomponent 2. The mission document or documents are current and explain the extent of the institution’s emphasis on the various aspects of its mission, such as instruction, scholarship, research, application of research, creative works, clinical service, public service, economic development, and religious or cultural purpose.

Subcomponent 3. The mission document or documents identify the nature, scope, and intended constituents of the higher education programs and services the institution provides.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• The college actively solicits input from faculty, staff, community members, the business community, and students when developing long-term plans. It provided evidence of listening sessions and surveys when planning large, new initiatives. College leaders use this feedback to craft the strategic plan that is available on its website.

• The 2013 AQIP Systems Portfolio presented evidence of several means for communicating the college’s mission to stakeholders. In 2010, it successfully achieved a $133.7 million referendum to support the Smart Future Building Initiative. The college was able to win this referendum through focused communication of a shared vision. It also held a centennial celebration that articulated its mission and values to public stakeholders.

Core Component 1C: The institution understands the relationship between its mission and the diversity of society.

Subcomponent 1. The institution addresses its role in a multicultural society.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s processes and activities reflect attention to human diversity as appropriate within its mission and for the constituencies it serves.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• In an effort to better serve its communities, the college expanded offerings at its West and South Madison campuses. The South Madison campus addresses the needs of a more diverse community population through ELL and GED courses, support for under prepared students, and entry-level Arts and Sciences classes for students just starting their college experience. The West campus offers a wide range of courses and programs to students at a convenient location. Madison College is the second largest provider of educational services to veterans in the State of Wisconsin, increasing access to veterans and their families. The college is a partner with the University of Wisconsin-Madison to provide a guaranteed “on- ramp” to admission. Madison College is the largest source of transfer students to the University of Wisconsin System.

• In response to demographic changes in its service area, Madison College has created a new position of Vice President of Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement. Recent improvements to the college’s diversity efforts include the hiring of bilingual recruiters to attract minority students, particularly Latino and multi- racial students, and establishing clearly defined diversity objectives for faculty development by the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL).

• Feedback obtained from diversity-related surveys (PACE, NILIE) clearly indicate positive employee responses toward the very high end of the consultative range, approaching collaborative-level results.

Core Component 1D: The institution’s mission demonstrates commitment to the public good.

Subcomponent 1. Actions and decisions reflect an understanding that in its educational role the institution serves the public, not solely the institution, and thus entails a public obligation.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s educational responsibilities take primacy over other purposes, such as generating financial returns for investors, contributing to a related or parent organization, or supporting external interests.

Subcomponent 3. The institution engages with its identified external constituencies and communities of interest and responds to their needs as its mission and capacity allow.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College demonstrates its commitment to the public good by analyzing the changing needs of its stakeholders through a variety of surveys (student satisfaction, training participants, employers, event participants, etc.), extensive use of advisory committees, and its participation with numerous schools, professional, and community organizations. In response to low enrollment in its Medical Transcription program, Madison College, through input from its advisory board, learned that medical transcription jobs now require a Medical Administrative Professional Associate Degree and discontinued its transcription program, shifting resources to medical administrative professional courses.

• Evidence of the college’s commitment to broadly serving the public good through its educational offerings and services include: four separate ethnic councils (Native American, African American, Hispanic, Asian, and Pacific Islander); employees serving on external advisory boards and community-based organizations, pursing grants specifically for programs targeting new student groups; participation in its Higher Education Partnership with UW-Madison and Edgewood College to understand prospective student need(s); sponsoring internal program advisory boards, and; strategic planning with local economic development councils and the Workforce Development Board of South Central Wisconsin.

• In response to the passage of Wisconsin 2011 Act 10 by the Wisconsin legislature (that affected public sector labor unions) and in anticipation of the March 2014 expiration of full-time faculty and staff contracts, the new administration implemented an interest-based approach (Interest-based Problem Solving or IBPS) as the means for stakeholders to resolve issues and to enable the college to fulfill its mission. In order to communicate this new approach, the college held convocations and many other sessions to inform employees. In its effort to begin institutionalizing the practice, Madison College established a dedicated office for the on-going education and practice of IBPS, having trained over 300 employees and some trustees.

Team Determination on Criterion One: _X_ Criterion is met

     ____ Criterion is met with concerns

     ____ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion:

• Madison College developed a new statement of mission, vision, and values in 2013. It has directly related this new statement of purpose to decision-making across the college by requiring that formal justification for major decisions address how they align with the mission of the institution. Its major, mission-related initiatives include creating a cabinet-level position for equity and inclusion, hiring bilingual recruiters, and implementing Interest-based Problem Solving. Beyond the obvious community support for the college in the passage of a large referendum, the college has shown objective results demonstrating improvement in the realm of leading and communicating its mission.

CRITERION TWO: Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct. The institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.

Core Component 2A: The institution operates with integrity in its financial, academic, personnel, and auxiliary functions; it establishes and follows fair and ethical policies and processes for its governing board, administration, faculty, and staff.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• As part of the state’s community and technical college system (WTCS), Madison College embraces a statutory, statewide Code of Ethics for all board of trustee members. It also has its own Code of Ethics for employees. Policies are established to guide the behavior of employees in specific areas including communication, finance, information technology, and student privacy among others. Policies related to employees are communicated through the institution’s Employee Handbook.

• As a part of its formal development of employees, all administrators are required to participate in ethically relevant training. Supervisory training, addressing ethical behavior for supervisors, is mandatory for all administrators. A well-planned professional development program is provided for all faculty. All completed training is reported to, and monitored by the CETL.

• To ensure Madison College operates with integrity and follows fair and ethical practices, multiple processes are in place. These include formal steps for resolving complaints, communicating its processes, formal in-class observations, performance appraisals, surveys of student opinion, a formal policy of dismissal, policy regarding use of human subjects in research, and a policy for the use of information and academic honesty.

Core Component 2B: The institution presents itself clearly and completely to its students and to the public with regard to its programs, requirements, faculty and staff, costs to students, control, and accreditation relationships.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College lists multiple means of communicating with students and the public about levels of preparedness, learning objectives, and other important information. These methods include the college website, course outlines, MAAP tools, and an online student center. These alternatives allow students multiple methods for accessing data, both in person and online. This variety recognizes the types of communication styles preferred by students and the public, allowing for individualization among the various units and programs of the college.

• While on campus, the team observed television monitors, bulletin board, and portable signage in all campus buildings providing information to students about college events, services and programs. Collateral materials used for recruiting and enrollment provided program requirements, costs, and workforce information to students. The College Viewbook includes accreditation references and program brochures that include accreditation references where appropriate.

Core Component 2C: The governing board of the institution is sufficiently autonomous to make decisions in the best interest of the institution and to assure its integrity.

Subcomponent 1. The governing board’s deliberations reflect priorities to preserve and enhance the institution.

Subcomponent 2. The governing board reviews and considers the reasonable and relevant interests of the institution’s internal and external constituencies during its decision-making deliberations.

Subcomponent 3. The governing board preserves its independence from undue influence on the part of donors, elected officials, ownership interests, or other external parties when such influence would not be in the best interest of the institution.

Subcomponent 4. The governing board delegates day-to-day management of the institution to the administration and expects the faculty to oversee academic matters.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Wisconsin statues specify the appointment process of District Board members, the governing board. The governing board reflects the distribution of women and minorities in the district. County board chairs of each of the 12 counties of the college’s district comprises the trustee appointment committee. Three seats are annually open for appointment. The District Board re-affirmed its commitment to a policy governance framework in March 2014, approving revised Board End Statements and modifications to its policy governance framework. District Board policy requires board member participation annually in at least one conference hosted by the Wisconsin Technical College’s District Boards Association, Inc. and the Association of Community College. During the team visit, District Board members clearly communicated an understanding of Board Governance and their priorities as a board. The District Board Chair understands her role and ensures that Board members do not engage in the day-to-day management of the institution. The District Board has sufficient autonomy to make decisions in the best interest of the college.

Core Component 2D: The institution is committed to freedom of expression and the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College’s original academic freedom statement was part of the collective bargaining agreement which expired in March 2014. A revised draft statement from the shared governance system was sent to the president during the spring semester of 2016 for review. Upon adoption by the College Assembly, the statement will be included in the college’s employee handbook, posted on the website, and presented at new faculty orientation. Full and part-time faculty are trained by the CETL to fully understand the college’s commitment to freedom of expression and the pursuit of truth in teaching and learning.

Core Component 2E: The institution’s policies and procedures call for responsible acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge by its faculty, students, and staff.

Subcomponent 1. The institution provides effective oversight and support services to ensure the integrity of research and scholarly practice conducted by its faculty, staff, and students.

Subcomponent 2. Students are offered guidance in the ethical use of information resources.

Subcomponent 3. The institution has and enforces policies on academic honesty and integrity.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• The college clearly ensures that its employees and students have access to resources to acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly. A Student Code of Conduct and Academic Integrity policy is in place that outlines expected behavior related to academic dishonesty, cheating, and copyright laws. The college employs an Academic Integrity Officer and has procedures for adjudicating violations. Enforcement of the policy and the disciplinary process are used as a teaching moment for students violating the policy. A structured method with levels of consequences is in place to ensure that when student violations occur, students learn and understand why a violation occurred. An Academic Integrity webpage provides links to resources, providing students guidance in the ethical use of material from other sources. The library provides teaching sessions on understanding plagiarism and utilizes SafeAssign, a tool for students. Academic Integrity information is presented to students through new student orientation, writing and research sessions presented to English and Written Communication classes, and by faculty at the beginning of the semester. The college’s syllabus template includes a link to the Academic Integrity policy. The Academic Integrity Officer conducts training with faculty regarding academic misconduct and identifying issues of academic misconduct. An Institutional Review Board oversees procedures for carrying out the college’s commitment to protect human subjects in research. Requests for research and analysis is provided by the Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness. Training concerning the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act is required for employees requesting access to student records of policy violations.

Team Determination on Criterion Two:_X_ Criterion is met

    ____ Criterion is met with concerns

    ____ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion:

• Madison College has a shared governance structure and processes which demonstrate a culture that acts with integrity and follows fair and ethical practices. The college has cross-functional work groups that use interest-based problem solving techniques to ensure that expectations and policies are communicated clearly to students, staff, faculty, administration, and the board. Strategic Directives, an Academic Plan, and Student Services Plan provide a foundation and strong evidence of how the college is responsible to its stakeholders. The college provides an organized training program for employees to ensure that policies are understood and implemented with integrity. Through orientation sessions, library resources, and online tools, students have the opportunity to acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly. There is evidence the college presents itself clearly to stakeholders through multiple media, including its website, campus signage, kiosks, newsletters, printed materials, and campus services. The District Board understands its’ ethical responsibility and works in the best interest of Madison College.

CRITERION THREE: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support. The institution provides high quality education, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.

Core Component 3A: The institution’s degree programs are appropriate to higher education.

Subcomponent 1. Courses and programs are current and require levels of performance by students appropriate to the degree or certificate awarded.

Subcomponent 2. The institution articulates and differentiates learning goals for its undergraduate, graduate, post-baccalaureate, post-graduate, and certificate programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution’s program quality and learning goals are consistent across all modes of delivery and all locations (on the main campus, at additional locations, by distance delivery, as dual credit, through contractual or consortial arrangements, or any other modality).

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• The college has collected favorable student-performance information on both career and transfer program graduates. Information collected on career program graduates includes employer and alumni surveys, advisory board input, and licensure exams. Transfer students, who predominantly matriculate to a neighboring public university, compare well in GPA and persistence to other transfer students.

• In the summer of 2015, Madison College implemented an Academic Strategy and Analysis (ASA) unit that gathers information related to industry and program trend data in academic innovation. ASA provides direct support for the creation of new academic credentials and programs. As of the fall 2015, the ASA is working on projects with 18 academic programs and completed work on 14 other projects.

• Through the visit, the team was able to verify that program quality and learning goals are consistent across all delivery methods and modes, and at additional locations within the region. Regional deans expressed a commitment to ensuring that students get the same education at a regional location as they do at the main campus. This is reinforced by course outlines being followed by all faculty within disciplines and those course outlines being available online for instructors to use. Dual credit course offerings follow the same course objectives and Madison College staff review those objectives to ensure consistency.

Core Component 3B: The institution demonstrates that the exercise of intellectual inquiry and the acquisition, application, and integration of broad learning and skills are integral to its educational programs.

Subcomponent 1. The general education program is appropriate to the mission, educational offerings, and degree levels of the institution.

Subcomponent 2. The institution articulates the purposes, content, and intended learning outcomes of its undergraduate general education requirements. The program of general education is grounded in a philosophy or framework developed by the institution or adopted from an established framework. It imparts broad knowledge and intellectual concepts to students and develops skills and attitudes that the institution believes every college-educated person should possess.

Subcomponent 3. Every degree program offered by the institution engages students in collecting, analyzing, and communicating information; in mastering modes of inquiry or creative work; and in developing skills adaptable to changing environments.

Subcomponent 4. The education offered by the institution recognizes the human and cultural diversity of the world in which students live and work.

Subcomponent 5. The faculty and students contribute to scholarship, creative work, and the discovery of knowledge to the extent appropriate to their programs and the institution’s mission.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College has determined shared objectives for learning and developing all students pursuing degrees at a particular level. Since revising its 8 Core Abilities (common learning objectives for the college) in 2014, the college has aligned them throughout program and departmental curricula and, in conjunction with, the outcomes for each of its occupational programs. The college was in the process of reviewing the Core Abilities as part of a revision of its Academic Plan in 2013-14. In 2014, based on employer feedback, the college renamed Core Abilities as “Core Workforce Skills”. The visit team was able to verify that the Core Workforce skills were vetted by the advisory committees and employers continue to express the validity of the skills identified. Schools within Madison College are looking at how its gatekeeper and general education courses promote strong success rates and make changes accordingly. Creative work and learning experiences are also offered to students that allows for project designs that are in some cases being used in the industry.

• The academic plan was revised over the last two years and has been reinvented into an Impact Initiative document that outlines the academic plan from 2014-2017. Based on the work of the college in its Master Facilities Plan, the spaces that have been redesigned to support student learning include active learning classrooms and moveable walls in the library. Since the last report, Madison College has hired a vice president of equity, inclusion, and community engagement to ensure cultural diversity.

• Madison College integrates broad learning and skills into its educational programs. Every student completes courses in communication, math, science, and social sciences. While each program determines the specific general education courses for its students, occupational program students are required to take at least 21 general education credits. Students who expect to transfer to other institutions complete 64 general education credits. These requirements are intended to give students the analytical, communication, and cultural competencies needed for inquiry, creative work, and lifelong learning.

Core Component 3C: The institution has the faculty and staff needed for effective, high- quality programs and student services.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has sufficient numbers and continuity of faculty members to carry out both the classroom and the non-classroom roles of faculty, including oversight of the curriculum and expectations for student performance; establishment of academic credentials for instructional staff; involvement in assessment of student learning.

Subcomponent 2. All instructors are appropriately credentialed, including those in dual credit, contractual, and consortial programs.

Subcomponent 3. Instructors are evaluated regularly in accordance with established institutional policies and procedures.

Subcomponent 4. The institution has processes and resources for assuring that instructors are current in their disciplines and adept in their teaching roles; it supports their professional development.

Subcomponent 5. Instructors are accessible for student inquiry.

Subcomponent 6. Staff members providing student support services, such as tutoring, financial aid advising, academic advising, and co-curricular activities, are appropriately qualified, trained, and supported in their professional development.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College implemented a personnel evaluation system for each category of faculty and staff with a goal to align the process to its overall goals and mission. The objective of the evaluation process is to have a clear, mutual understanding of an individual’s performance aimed at achieving continuous individual improvement.

• While somewhat state led, Madison College does have a Faculty Quality Assurance program to ensure that full-time faculty members engage in professional development opportunities and that those same opportunities are offered to adjunct faculty as well. The CETL coordinates these activities, offering courses for professional development for faculty. As an additional resource, the college provides adjunct faculty with mentors and has adjunct liaisons to support adjunct faculty.

• The institution has developed a credentialing process to ensure quality faculty and staff for its programs and services. The process begins with the creation or review of a job description, outlining the essential functions required along with the necessary minimum skills and qualifications needed for success. These processes also align with the state certification process to ensure that the staff involved with instruction and counseling meet appropriate academic, occupation, and teaching requirements. When hiring faculty, whether adjunct or full-time, associate deans use the same hiring process to ensure academic credentials are properly met. This includes the hiring of adjuncts at the regional centers and will be used in hiring dual credit faculty as Madison expands its dual credit offerings. This process is consistent across the college and was a project out of the Center for Operational Excellence (COE) that is beginning to become ingrained in the institution.

  Core Component 3D: The institution provides support for student learning and effective teaching.

Subcomponent 1. The institution provides student support services suited to the needs of its student populations.

Subcomponent 2. The institution provides for learning support and preparatory instruction to address the academic needs of its students. It has a process for directing entering students to courses and programs for which the students are adequately prepared.

Subcomponent 3. The institution provides academic advising suited to its programs and the needs of its students.

Subcomponent 4. The institution provides to students and instructors the infrastructure and resources necessary to support effective teaching and learning (technological infrastructure, scientific laboratories, libraries, performance spaces, clinical practice sites, museum collections, as appropriate to the institution’s offerings).

Subcomponent 5. The institution provides to students guidance in the effective use of research and information resources.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College provides support in several areas that include Advising Services, College and Career Transitions, School of Academic Advancement for student remediation, a Writing Center, and other similar services. Placement, student achievement centers, and libraries are located at each site to ensure that services are provided consistently among all locations. Recent building projects have been designed with the students in mind. This includes accessibility to student services, student art being displayed, kiosks in hallways, and an abundance of computer labs and computer accessibility.

• To support faculty understanding in the diversity of student learning, instructors are required to complete seven modules, three of which address learning styles. This learning may then be applied in the classroom to enhance student learning. As Madison College moves to the an advising model that involves four levels of advising, training for faculty is provided to ensure that faculty understand the new model and how to advise students.

• The college website offers many self-directed resources to help current and prospective students assess programs. A Career Cluster Interest Survey helps determine which programs best fit a student’s interests and needs. Other resources on this site include a video on the career development process, links to a Career Survey, a new Career Coach tool, and the Career Planning Workshops among other resources.

• The site visit team was able to appreciate that Madison College has shown a commitment to student access and guidance related to research and information sources. Library staff are knowledgeable regarding research and have developed resources based on enrollment trends. The library, itself, contains a classroom within the (library) facility for library instruction. Technology is incorporated into the facility and students are able to check-out the latest technology for use inside and outside the library.

Core Component 3E: The institution fulfills the claims it makes for an enriched educational environment.

Subcomponent 1. Co-curricular programs are suited to the institution’s mission and contribute to the educational experience of its students.

Subcomponent 2. The institution demonstrates any claims it makes about contributions to its students’ educational experience by virtue of aspects of its mission, such as research, community engagement, service learning, religious or spiritual purpose, and economic development.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• The Student Life Office utilizes the Core Abilities Student Self-Assessment to determine the strengths and appropriate learning opportunities for student leaders. Areas that are identified for focus become themes for retreats and training opportunities with student groups. The Student Life Office is working to align its assessment strategies with the Core Workforce Skills.

• The college’s Alternative Break Program provides learning opportunities that allow students to travel and serve in a particular community. For example, the Veterinary Technician Program hosts a trip each spring that provides intentional opportunities for students to apply classroom learning with a goal of expanding their skill sets.

• The Center for International Education (CIE) facilitates global education initiatives through the coordination of study-abroad programs, international student services, and the Interdisciplinary Global Studies Certificate. These initiatives link specific learning outcomes to support global competency. Madison College has a strong commitment to the community and the administration vocalizes its social obligation to the community and students of the Madison area. This includes the establishment of an Entrepreneurship Center, many student clubs and organizations, international sponsored study abroad trips, volunteer groups that connect with the community, and an athletic complex expansion.

Team Determination on Criterion Three:_X_ Criterion is met

      ____ Criterion is met with concerns

      ____ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion:

• Madison College demonstrates continuous quality improvement in Criterion 3 through initiatives that have continued since its systems portfolio, numerous initiatives to ensure the continued development of academic programs, and responsiveness to workplace demands. Madison College has assurances from advisory committees on the 8 Core Abilities and, based on feedback, has renamed them Core Workforce Skills. The college has revised its academic plan and continues to research student success rates and persistence in gatekeeper courses. It has taken steps to ensure that full and part-time faculty are hired with appropriate credentials and are offered professional development opportunities. Additionally, Madison College has a number of student support services available to students to provide them with the resources they need to be successful inside and outside of the classroom.

CRITERION FOUR: Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement. The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

Core Component 4A: The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs.

Subcomponent 1. The institution maintains a practice of regular program reviews.

Subcomponent 2. The institution evaluates all the credit that it transcripts, including what it awards for experiential learning or other forms of prior learning.

Subcomponent 3. The institution has policies that assure the quality of the credit it accepts in transfer.

Subcomponent 4. The institution maintains and exercises authority over the prerequisites for courses, rigor of courses, expectations for student learning, access to learning resources, and faculty qualifications for all its programs, including dual credit programs. It assures that its dual credit courses or programs for high school students are equivalent in learning outcomes and levels of achievement to its higher education curriculum.

Subcomponent 5. The institution maintains specialized accreditation for its programs as appropriate to its educational purposes.

Subcomponent 6. The institution evaluates the success of its graduates. The institution assures that the degree or certificate programs it represents as preparation for advanced study or employment accomplish these purposes. For all programs, the institution looks to indicators it deems appropriate to its mission, such as employment rates, admission rates to advanced degree programs, and participation rates in fellowships, internships, and special programs (e.g., Peace Corps and Americorps).

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College uses accrediting bodies, advisory boards, articulation agreements, state requirements, student and other stakeholder feedback, and the Unit Planning Process to keep its programming informed. The college continually assesses its feedback processes to produce responsive academic programming. Advisory Boards’ input and data from employers and student surveys provide information to help assure the quality of programs and the employees hired. Bridge programming to accelerate remediation was initiated in engineering and is currently being extended to construction and machining. These Essentials of <the program area> are integrated into the related College Associate of Applied Science degrees.

• The Academic Strategy and Analysis unit of the Office of the Vice Provost was created in summer 2015 to respond to evolving student, employer, and stakeholder needs for tracking innovation in areas such as accelerated, on-line and competency based learning, embedded credentials, and career pathways. Interest Based Problem Solving and Shared Governance are being used to promote the Strategic Directives including successful student outcomes, sustainability, support of faculty and staff, student preparedness, community needs, recruitment, and outreach. The unit is developing a Program Assessment Tool and Process. Program directors, faculty, and deans are appreciative of the tool’s development and the information that it provides. The college will use this information to create new programs, adapt existing programs, and eliminate those that are no longer needed. The college transfer websites, both for students transferring credits in and out, clearly outlines the process and opportunities for students. A recent project of the COE provided consistent standards and language across programs and support faculty assessing experiential learning, including Credit for Prior Learning. The college has opportunities to develop new dual credit courses with its secondary partners identified by campus, including courses in arts and sciences, core workforce skills, and career pathways.

• The college is in the process of redesigning its websites to be more user-friendly, to provide consistent information, and to provide links to other sources. It has documentation in place for all of its specialized accreditations, including the recent reaffirmation of the Ophthalmic Clinical Assistant program. A review of program brochures provided evidence of appropriate information on accreditation, costs, and program requirements to students and the public.

Core Component 4B: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has clearly stated goals for student learning and effective processes for assessment of student learning and achievement of learning goals.

Subcomponent 2. The institution assesses achievement of the learning outcomes that it claims for its curricular and co-curricular programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning.

Subcomponent 4. The institution’s processes and methodologies to assess student learning reflect good practice, including the substantial participation of faculty and other instructional staff members.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Student learning for general education (named by the college as Core Workforce Skills) and program specific outcomes are assessed through national and state accreditations, examinations and certifications, through outcomes developed with feedback from employers and Advisory Boards, through the state-mandated Technical Skills Attainment process and through articulation agreements with University of Wisconsin System institutions. The deans of the six schools within the college and associated faculty are responsible for identification of learning objectives and associated assessments. The college hired a full-time curriculum specialist in 2014 to lead college efforts to assess whether students have met college-wide general education Core Workforce Skills and program specific learning objectives. There are many horizontal, cross-functional committees and workgroups that provide for communication and collaboration across the College’s campuses and programs. The college is using the student information system PeopleSoft to record whether students are meeting program objectives, including the general education requirements or newly named Core Workforce Skills, to provide specific data to faculty through the College’s reporting system Cognos--online, just in time and easily accessed.

• The college affirmed its core abilities for student learning outcomes, its general education outcomes expected for all undergraduate degree completers, through an extensive college wide process involving internal and external stakeholders. Upon the advice of employers, advisory board and community members looking for “soft skills” in communication, calculation, analysis, natural science, interpersonal communications, teamwork and leadership skills the college renamed their core abilities or general education as “Core Workforce Skills” in 2014. Faculty from liberal arts and sciences and program faculty developed an assessment rubric for assessing the general education or Core Workforce Skills. The rubric was offered for faculty use on a voluntary basis in all 2015 with broad acceptance by the faculty involved in the pilot. A total of 646 students in 33 classes in business and health and in arts and sciences (general education) were assessed, which surpassed the College’s initial goals. The College plans to analyze results and feedback, make any appropriate changes in the rubric, and issue an invitation to all faculty to use the rubric in fall 2016. Student services is using the assessment rubric and providing assistance from Student Life to match their initiatives with student outcome performance. A wide variety of 120 student clubs, experiential and service learning activities provide co-curricular opportunities to achieve student learning outcomes of the college and the program.

• The college assesses the general education (or renamed Core Workforce Skills) required for the Liberal Arts Transfer programs (Associate in Arts and Associate in Science) in the same way it assesses student outcomes for the Core Workforce Skills in occupational programs. The general education requirements for students intending to complete an Associate in Arts or Associate in Science degree and/or transfer to a four-year baccalaureate program may be found in the Liberal_Arts_Transfer_Curriculum_Sheet.pdf. Undergraduate students wishing to transfer to the University of Wisconsin. Madison complete the general education requirements: Communications 3-6 credits, Ethnic studies 3 cr., Quantitative Reasoning 3-6 cr., Natural Science 4-6 ct. including lab, humanities/literature/arts 6 cr. and Social Studies 3 cr. http://programs.madisoncollege.edu/courses/liberal-arts-transfer This is according to an articulation agreement between Madison College and the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Students wishing to know how their Madison College credits will transfer to a Wisconsin State University may consult the Wisconsin Transfer Information System https://www.wisconsin.edu/transfer/wisconsin-technical-college-student-…

• The COE unit within the Office of the Vice President for Institutional Learning and Effectiveness was created in fall 2014. The unit works on projects to improve outcomes for students and improve efficiency. It starts by establishing key metrics to review performance and compares performance with industry. Recent projects include Credit for Prior Learning and Part-time (Adjunct) Faculty Recruitment, Hiring and Orientation, Fostering Consistent Practices and Tools, and Creating Pools of Adjunct Faculty. The college now has the opportunity to review adjunct faculty with new standards for currency and for hiring across divisions.

• The college has embarked on a state reporting requirement for technical program students (Technical Skill Attainment). Faculty and program directors have served on statewide committees to determine program outcomes that are informed by program advisory boards. Data collection has been initiated in three programs but, because of the newness of the process, no assessments have been completed. The college has the opportunity to use industry recognized credentials and assessments to better prepare students for career pathways and to further develop career pathways with its secondary partners.

• The CETL has redesigned its professional development for part-time and fulltime faculty and staff in response to the Faculty Quality Assurance System that was put in place by the Wisconsin Technical College System in 2015 and the college’s Strategic Directives. New offerings include 2-3 different tracks regarding assessment and a flow chart and supports for faculty. CETL staff offer instruction in multiple, alternative formats in the newly reconstructed library, online, and at multiple campus sites.

Core Component 4C: The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and completion rates in its degree and certificate programs.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has defined goals for student retention, persistence, and completion that are ambitious but attainable and appropriate to its mission, student populations, and educational offerings.

Subcomponent 2. The institution collects and analyzes information on student retention, persistence, and completion of its programs.

Subcomponent 3. The institution uses information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs to make improvements as warranted by the data.

Subcomponent 4. The institution’s processes and methodologies for collecting and analyzing information on student retention, persistence, and completion of programs reflect good practice. (Institutions are not required to use IPEDS definitions in their determination of persistence or completion rates. Institutions are encouraged to choose measures that are suitable to their student populations, but institutions are accountable for the validity of their measures.)

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• By benchmarking NCCBP retention, persistence, and completion data, Madison College demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement. The institution analyzes prospective student and current student information from a variety of clearly identified sources at the college level and at the unit level. Its conclusions are incorporated into the college’s Retention Plan and relevant unit plans, including the unit plan for the Student Development Center. The math faculty have used the information to restructure enrollments in current developmental courses based on student performance in the first weeks of the course(s). This provides additional support to those students needing it and allows higher performing students to progress at a faster rate. The college initiated a Reverse Transfer Plan to provide better completion for students transferring to partner baccalaureate granting institutions. It is using data provided by Institutional Research to set internal benchmarks and make decisions in area like hiring and facilities. The Madison College has the opportunity through the NCCBP and partnerships with industry leaders on Advisory Boards to set external benchmarks and to develop improvement strategies based on that information.

• The Program Assessment Tool and Process for program review designed by a team involving adjunct faculty, fulltime faculty, and others is being implemented. The pilot phase involves 2-3 programs from each school. IT programming is being accomplished however, the pilot is being conducted with non-automated data pulls. The automated tool will be refined based on feedback from pilot participants. Complete rollout, including training for faculty and staff, is projected to begin fall 2016.

Team Determination on Criterion Four:_X_ Criterion is met

     ____ Criterion is met with concerns

     ____ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion:

• The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services through program accreditation, its program review process, and feedback from employers and students. It evaluates the effectiveness of student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement (including program review), student technical skill attainment, and program and core workforce skills outcomes assessments that are reviewed by faculty, administration and program advisory boards. All courses, regardless of delivery method or location, follow the same course outline and assess the same learner outcomes. These are available on the college website. The Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning provides orientation and professional development to all fulltime and part-time faculty. Professional Development is designed by faculty to meet the college’s Strategic Initiatives. The college is encouraged to continue its development of the Program Assessment Tool and analysis process to make decisions on program adaptations and changes.

CRITERION FIVE: Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness. The institution’s resources, structures, and processes are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and opportunities. The institution plans for the future.

Core Component 5A: The institution’s resource base supports its current educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has the fiscal and human resources and physical and technological infrastructure sufficient to support its operations wherever and however programs are delivered.

Subcomponent 2. The institution’s resource allocation process ensures that its educational purposes are not adversely affected by elective resource allocations to other areas or disbursement of revenue to a superordinate entity.

Subcomponent 3. The goals incorporated into mission statements or elaborations of mission statements are realistic in light of the institution’s organization, resources, and opportunities.

Subcomponent 4. The institution’s staff in all areas are appropriately qualified and trained.

Subcomponent 5. The institution has a well-developed process in place for budgeting and for monitoring expense.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College has specifically targeted grant monies in order to advance the institution's finances, but the possibility of decreasing of state appropriations and a state-wide freeze on tuition is a concern. However, the visiting team was able to ascertain that Madison College has a sound plan to cope with the financial downturn and the plan has been implemented with success. The college is aware that it is transitioning from a "resource rich institution” to a "resource limited institution.” Additionally, Madison College maintains a sound resource allocation process to ensure that its educational programs are not affected by resource allocation. Various campus departments indicated that their resource allocations were sufficient to meet program needs. Additionally, the college has initiated sound technological infrastructure to support its campus operations. The executive team does a good job of maintaining oversight on budget and expense monitoring with a transparent approach to its allocation processes. Of particular note is the $11,000,000 capital campaign that is underway through the College’s foundation (a separate entity) has demonstrated great progress with one gift in the amount of $6,000,000 for new community and college athletic fields. The remaining $5,000,000 to be raised will be employed to support scholarships, student success initiatives, and culinary and baking program capital needs.

• Madison College maintains a strong vision statement that has been updated to state “The leader in accessible, affordable education that meets the evolving needs of our diverse communities.” Additionally the college's goals are aligned with its mission statement. Yet, the institution did not address its policies for the regular revision of its mission and vision statements and little attention was granted to the campus-wide individuals involved in the development of the revised mission statements. However, the visiting team was able to determine that the mission, vision, and values statements were developed through a broad-based initiative with multiple inputs and reviews

• Madison College has very well-defined procedures to determine the appropriateness of its faculty and staff credentials. Additionally, the institution devotes time and energy to training its new employees. One suggestion might be for the institution to succinctly address its procedures for monitoring the credentials of its dual credit faculty and its plan for meeting dual credit faculty credential stipulations by the September 1, 2017 deadline.

Core Component 5B: The institution’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the institution to fulfill its mission.

Subcomponent 1. The institution has and employs policies and procedures to engage its internal constituencies—including its governing board, administration, faculty, staff, and students—in the institution’s governance.

Subcomponent 2. The governing board is knowledgeable about the institution; it provides oversight for the institution’s financial and academic policies and practices and meets its legal and fiduciary responsibilities.

Subcomponent 3. The institution enables the involvement of its administration, faculty, staff, and students in setting academic requirements, policy, and processes through effective structures for contribution and collaborative effort.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College employed an IPBS trainer and facilitator to assist in the institution's efforts to engage all campus entities in learning about IBPS and preparing for shared governance processes. The District Board appears to take the lead in enacting policies on shared governance and the faculty and staff are solicited for input through the strategic plan. However, it was not clear how the college engages all campus entities in the institution's governance. The campus has initiated several improvements in its shared governance processes as stated in its institutional highlights report. The visiting team was able to verify that the institution provided planning documents clearly illustrated their shared governance initiatives. Additionally, the board demonstrates keen knowledge of the institution. It demonstrates appropriate oversight responsibility of financial and academic policies and practices while abiding by its legal and fiduciary responsibilities. The board is well-versed in its role and functions for Madison College. Its membership infuses of new members while still maintaining the experience of returning board members.

• Madison College has employed cross-functional teams to develop and revise the eight Core Abilities as the common learning objectives for the college. Additionally, it used a broad-based team approach to the development of learning objectives, to the implementation of licensure and accreditation processes, and to the development of a Technical Skills Attainment initiative. The institution may benefit from a more coherent structure for conceiving and designing new programs or courses since the current structure could lead to duplication of effort or conflicting opinions.

Core Component 5C: The institution engages in systematic and integrated planning.

Subcomponent 1. The institution allocates its resources in alignment with its mission and priorities.

Subcomponent 2. The institution links its processes for assessment of student learning, evaluation of operations, planning, and budgeting.

Subcomponent 3. The planning process encompasses the institution as a whole and considers the perspectives of internal and external constituent groups.

Subcomponent 4. The institution plans on the basis of a sound understanding of its current capacity. Institutional plans anticipate the possible impact of fluctuations in the institution’s sources of revenue, such as enrollment, the economy, and state support.

Subcomponent 5. Institutional planning anticipates emerging factors, such as technology, demographic shifts, and globalization.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College employs a systematic process of allocating its resources in alignment with its mission and priorities. A Unit Planning Process is used to specifically identify operational and capital needs, including technology. The unit requests are prioritized within departments and are forwarded to the executive team for prioritization. The allocation process is linked to the strategic objectives of the institution and the visiting team was able to determine that the resource allocations are linked directly to the institution's mission and vision. Also, the college extends the systematic use of data to be used in unit- and program-levels of decision-making. Unit-level data such as retention, enrollment, and student success is provided to academic units for planning and budgeting purposes. The Institutional Research Office displays support for all assessment initiatives.

• Madison College considers input from both internal and external constituent groups in its planning processes. Examples of this include advisory committee feedback that is crucial to academic planning. Also, student survey responses have been employed to make decisions on institutional planning in the areas of student success, bookstore operations, and articulation agreements. However, the institution's planning processes could be strengthened by a more detailed description of how the data are used and who is involved in the decision-making processes. Additionally, the college would benefit from a more detailed analysis of data from its external constituents.

• Madison College indicated that its long-term financial planning assumed a decrease in state funding and state required freeze on tuition. It appears to be planning for these funding issues, but a more detailed analysis of the possible repercussions should be built into the institution's planning processes. While the college addressed technology implementations in a limited manner in its systems portfolio, this campus visit revealed an awareness of technology needs and how these technologies would be employed to meet program and student needs. The college did not provide a great deal of information related to the impact of possible demographic shifts and globalization but it has implemented off-campus centers that should help to address changes in student demographics. Additionally, the Madison College is well-aware of its changing population in the surrounding counties and has taken steps to meet the needs of these demographic changes. A new recruiting plan has been initiated to meet the changing student demographics. The campus diversity initiatives are commendable in the institution's aspirations to address its changing population.

Core Component 5D: The institution works systematically to improve its performance.

Subcomponent 1. The institution develops and documents evidence of performance in its operations.

Subcomponent 2. The institution learns from its operational experience and applies that learning to improve its institutional effectiveness, capabilities, and sustainability, overall and in its component parts.

Team Determination: _X_ Core Component is met

      ____ Core Component is met with concerns

      ____ Core Component is not met

Evidence:

• Madison College employs its strategic goals to determine the needed data to support planning and improvement efforts. Specific goals are based upon its Strategic Plan and the college developed a single Unit Planning process that is used to review past efforts, to envision future endeavors, and to review provided data. The institution is encouraged to further develop the efficiency of the Unit Planning process and to develop similar measures of planning processes. Also, the institution collects college-wide data and the results are shared with designated campus entities. The college has established a cross-functional team to review and analyze the data and to draft action plans for improvements. All findings are shared with its executive team and board. Madison College has made tremendous strides since the submission of its most recent Systems Portfolio and has initiated several pilot projects to better the student learning experience. The College is to be commended on its initiatives and is encouraged to further develop and implement its processes of continuous improvement.

Team Determination on Criterion Five:_X_ Criterion is met

    ____ Criterion is met with concerns

    ____ Criterion is not met

Summary Statement on Criterion:

• Madison College has demonstrated a state of keen attention to its resources, planning, and institutional effectiveness standards of quality. The college has initiated substantial planning efforts to meet changes in resources and to meet the changing needs of its students. The Board of Trustees maintains an appropriate level of oversight of all campus initiatives and the institution has implemented a very strong shared governance process. It has done a good job with its initiatives and Madison College is encouraged to continue its commitment to quality initiatives.

COMMITMENT TO CONTINUOUS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT (CQI)

1. Levels of Organizational Maturity in Relation to AQIP Categories

   The site visit team believes that Madison College’s organizational maturity has been evolving over the last two years under a new administration. It has demonstrated that it is aligned in relation to the AQIP categories and is on a path to becoming integrated.

   Madison College’s strengths in relation to its organizational maturity include a strong commitment to AQIP and the site visit team was able to observe how the AQIP categories have become ingrained in the culture of the institution. The challenge for Madison College will be to keep its momentum with the many pilot projects it has and to continue its quality journey. Madison College has become a stronger institution since its last systems appraisal, under the direction of a new leadership team.

2. Evidence of Principles of High Performance Organizations

   Madison College consistently evidenced principles of high performing organizations across the institution and over time. Its handling of the successful passage of the largest such referendum in the state’s history demonstrated a focus on stakeholders, foresight to plan proactively, and broad-based involvement. Its implementation of Interest-based Problem Solving in response to 2011 Wisconsin Act 10 shows the college’s respect for people, leadership support, promotion of collaboration, and its integrity in words and deeds. Improvements in hiring a diversity officer and faculty development that specifically addresses local changes provided evidence that Madison College is agile and responsive to change. A learning orientation and fact-based use of information has become a part of a cultural change that has clearly emerged in recent years.

COMMITMENT TO AQIP PATHWAY

1. Actions That Capitalize on Systems Appraisal Feedback

   Madison College has displayed an acute degree of attention to the Systems Appraisal Feedback Report that it received. The college was receptive to the feedback provided and displayed a responsiveness to suggested improvements. The institution has adopted a commitment to quality attitude on a campus-wide basis. The visiting team was impressed by the institution's actions that had been undertaken since the change in administration and also by the institution's reception of visiting team input.

2. Actions That Capitalize on Strategy Forum Participation

   Madison College’s actions that were the direct result of its strategy forum participation include:

   • attended Strategy Forum immediately following the hiring of a new president;

   • focused solely on the “OO” regarding student learning objectives;

   • hired a full-time Curriculum Specialist to lead assessment efforts;

   • confirmed the Core Abilities and renamed them to Core Workforce Skills;

   • created universal rubric to assess Core Workforce Skills across the college;

   • developed a crosswalk identifying where program learning objectives would be assessed, and;

   • offered professional development opportunities for faculty related to assessment.

3. Actions That Capitalize on Action Projects

   The team reviewed 37 action projects that have been formally declared by Madison College. The institution has pursued projects that directly address AQIP Categories 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 and has completed 32 projects. The college is a learning organization that documents projects, reports project status in a timely fashion, is able to draw conclusions about project outcomes, and has a competency in institutionalizing processes. As a result of its action projects, Madison College has demonstrated quality improvements in:

   • assessment,

   • benchmarking,

   • cultural change,

   • advising,

   • retention, and the

   • use of data in addition to numerous process improvements in a variety of other areas.

4. Commitment to Active Engagement in AQIP

   Madison College’s commitment to active engagement in AQIP was clearly evident to the visiting team. Consistently and across the institution, this was evident in the leadership’s vision, everyday language used by employees, and their pursuit of mission. The culture of Madison College demonstrated a commitment to continuous quality improvement, the Academic Quality Improvement Program, and the Higher Learning Commission’s criteria for accreditation. All members of the visiting team were in agreement that Madison College is a good citizen of AQIP.

TEAM RECOMMENDATION

1. Affiliation Status

   1. Recommendation for Reaffirmation of Accreditation

      Reaffirmation of accreditation for Madison Area Technical College is recommended.

   2. Recommendation for Eligibility to Select Next Pathway

      It is recommended that Madison Area Technical College be allowed to select its pathway.

      Rationale: Madison Area Technical College has demonstrated its good citizenship of the AQIP pathway.

   3. Criterion-related Monitoring Required (report, focused visit):

      Monitoring: None

      Rationale: na

   4. Federal Compliance Monitoring Required (report, focused visit):

      Monitoring: None

      Rationale: na

   5. Commission Sanction or Adverse Action

      None

EMBEDDED CHANGES IN AFFILIATION STATUS

Did the team review any of the following types of change in the course of its evaluation? Check Yes or No for each type of change.

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Legal Status

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Degree Level

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Program Change

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Distance or Correspondence Education

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Contractual or Consortial Arrangements

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Mission or Student Body

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Clock or Credit Hour

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Additional Locations or Campuses

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Access to Notification

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Access to Expedited Desk Review

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Teach-out Arrangement

( ) Yes

( X ) No

Other Change

Appendix A

Interactions with Constituencies

Comprehensive Quality Review evaluation team members met with individuals and groups in the following constituencies in formal meetings and informal conversations in conjunction with the Madison Area Technical College visit:

• President and President’s Cabinet --administrators, faculty and student liaison.

• Board of Trustees Chair, Co-chair and member representatives

• Faculty, full-time and part-time, e.g., math, communications, English as a Second Language, Honors, Nursing, Dental Assisting, Automotive Technology, psychology, social media, marketing, college success, protective services

• Program directors, e.g. emergency services, culinary, baking, dental assisting and hygiene, automotive technology, marketing, natural resources and park management, protective services

• Deans of Schools, Regional Deans and Associate Deans

• Provost and Associate Provost

• Diversity and Civil Rights-Vice President Equity and Inclusion, Disability staff, Recruiters

• Student Service and Success-Vice Presidents, Enrollment Services, Registrar, Admissions Director, Dean of Students and Student Development, Student Life staff

• Advisers, transfer services staff, transition specialists and recruiters, including bilingual recruiter

• Student Achievement Center Director, students

• Institutional Learning and Effectiveness, Vice President, Director and Information Technology Director and staff

• Budget Director, Administrative and Facilities Services

• Human Resources division director and staff

• Academic Strategy and Analysis unit members, Program Assessment, Assessment consultant, Assessment Coordinator, Assessment staff

• Academic Integrity Officer

• Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning Staff

• Center for Operational Excellence Staff

• Placement Office Staff

• Interest Based Problem Solving/Shared Governance Representative

• Dual Credit Coordinator

• Librarian, Library Staff, and Students

• Compliance Officer

• International Education Director

• Action Project Managers and Team Members

Appendix B

Principal Documents, Materials, and Web Pages Reviewed

Documents

Annual Report 2015, Madison College

AQIP Systems Portfolio Addendum, MATC, 2016 Blackboard 9 Quick Guide

Branch Campus Bookstore Policies Branch Campus Hours of Operation Branch Campus Inter-library Loan Policies

Center for Operational Excellence—0verview, accomplishments, structure, relationships, next steps, Spring 2015; Status of Projects March 18, 2016

Class Schedules

Core Workforce Skills Document

Correspondence from Commission on Accreditation of Ophthalmic Medical Programs Data Shakedown Research Agenda – 2015-2016 Document

Elements of Decision Making, MATC, November, 2015 Establishing Credits for Prior Learning Process

Facts at a Glance Brochure

Faculty Quality Assurance System Guide to Professional Development, Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.

FAS Guide to Professional Development Brochure Federal Compliance Report, March 2016

FQAS Guide to Professional Development

Highlights Report, MATC, 2016 Comprehensive Quality Review Impact Initiative

International Student Enrollments, Madison College, 2004-2005 through 2015-2016 Library Checkout Policies

Library Room Reservation Policies

Madison College 2015-college publication, view book for students and the public

Madison Area Technical College District Board, FY 2015-2016

Multi-Campus Evaluation Report for HLC CQR Visit 2016 and Addendum of Primary Programs by Campus

Our Shared Vision for the Future, March 2014

Program brochures representative of schools, career pathways, associate degrees, diplomas and certificates: Applied Science, Engineering and Technology—Automotive Technology, Civil Engineering Technology, Mechanical Design Technology; Business and Applied Arts— Accounting, Business Management, CISCO Certified Networking Associate (CCNA), Human Resource Management, Meeting and Event Management, Mobile Marketing (Social Media); Health Education—Associate Degree Nursing, Dental Hygienist, Health Administrative and Insurance Certificate, Optometric Technician, Nursing Assistant; Human and Protective Services—Early Childhood Education, Fire Protection Technician and Paramedic Technician; Paralegal; Therapeutic Massage

Recruitment packet which included: College View Book, College Resources for Prospective Students reference sheet, The Road to Madison College reference sheets for fall and spring, Bridge Program information, Experience Madison College postcard, program brochures.

Shared Governance-Interest Based Problem Solving Issue Analysis Sheet and President Review Request

Strategic Plan: Mission, Value, Vision and Strategic Directives-Madison College Summer Session Faculty Assignment Process, 3-2-15

Systems Appraisal Feedback Report, Madison Area Technical College, September, 2013 Systems Portfolio-Madison Area Technical College, May 2013

The Technical College Effect, Wisconsin Technical Colleges 2016 Your Home Director –H Drive & Fileway Quick Guide

Webpages

Academic Integrity

Biotechnology Bridge Program

Budget document MATC FY2014-2015 (FY14-15 Budget 06-17-2014.pdf)

Code of Conduct Student Responsibilities

Computer Assisted Modular (CAM) Math

Construction Essentials Bridge

Dual Credit

Highlights Report, MATC, HLC Comprehensive Quality Review 2016 (Highlights Report below)

Impact Initiative-academic plan 2014-2017

Industrial Maintenance Bridge Program

Institutional Review Board

National Community College Benchmarking Project-reports available by college members http://www.nccbp.org/benchmarks

Part-time Faculty Orientation Guidebook (orientation-guidebook-2014-15-Version1.8.1.pdf)

Pillars of Promise-student services plan

Plan to Assess Student Learning Outcomes 2015 flowchart (Plan to Assess SLO.pdf)

Reverse transfer

Shared Governance and Interest Based Problem Solving http://libguides.madisoncollege.edu/sharedgovernanceandibps

Transfer Credit in, including AP, credit for prior learning, college credits

Transfer Out: Checklist

Appendix C

Federal Compliance Worksheet

Federal Compliance Worksheet for Review Panels and Evaluation Teams

Effective September 1, 2014 – August 31, 2016

Evaluation of Federal Compliance Components

The panel reviews each item identified in the Federal Compliance Guide and documents its findings in the appropriate spaces below. The panel should expect the institution to address these requirements with brief narrative responses and provide supporting documentation, where necessary. If the panel finds in the course of this review that there are substantive issues with the institution’s fulfillment of these requirements, it should document them in the space provided below.

This worksheet outlines the information the panel should review in relation to the federal requirements and provides spaces for the team’s conclusions in relation to each requirement. The panel should refer to the Federal Compliance Guide for Institutions and Evaluation Teams in completing this worksheet. The Guide identifies applicable Commission policies and an explanation of each requirement. The evaluation team will review the areas the panel identified for further review and will consider the panel’s workin light of information gained in the on-ground visit.

Institution under review: Madison Area Technical College

Panel Members

Dr. Kathy Player, EdD
Vice President and Chief Academic Officer, Health Sciences Education and Vice President of Clinical Operations
Midwestern University (AZ & IL)

Mr. David Ho
Retired Vice President for Academic Affairs Metropolitan Community College (NE)

Team Findings

No compliance issues were identified by the visiting team during the visit. Panel concerns were discussed with college representatives and addressed to the satisfaction of the team. Madison Area Technical College (MATC or Madison College) meets the Commission’s requirements for federal compliance. No monitoring is recommended.

DETAILED REVIEW OF FEDERAL COMPLIANCE

Assignment of Credits, Program Length, and Tuition

Address this requirement by completing the “Team Worksheet for Evaluating an Institution’s Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours” in the Appendix at the end of this document.

Institutional Records of Student Complaints

The institution has documented a process in place for addressing student complaints and appears to be systematically processing such complaints as evidenced by the data on student complaints since the last comprehensive evaluation.

1. Review the process that the institution uses to manage complaints as well as the history of complaints received and processed with a particular focus in that history on the past three or four years.

2. Determine whether the institution has a process to review and resolve complaints in a timely manner.

3. Verify that the evidence shows that the institution can, and does, follow this process and that it is able to integrate any relevant findings from this process into its review and planning processes.

4. Advise the institution of any improvements that might be appropriate.

5. Consider whether the record of student complaints indicates any pattern of complaints or otherwise raises concerns about the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation or Assumed Practices.

6. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

Comments:

• The college has a documented and disclosed complaints procedure. The FCR panel reviewed the complaint logs for student harassment/discrimination (07/2011 through 06/2015) and general student complaints (10/2011 through 12/2015). The analyses and subsequent resolutions of the complaints have enabled the college to improve student processes including the case management of complaints.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Publication of Transfer Policies

The institution has demonstrated it is appropriately disclosing its transfer policies to students and to the public. Policies contain information about the criteria the institution uses to make transfer decisions.

1. Review the institution’s transfer policies.

2. Review any articulation agreements the institution has in place, including articulation agreements at the institution level and program-specific articulation agreements.

3. Consider where the institution discloses these policies (e.g., in its catalog, on its web site) and how easily current and prospective students can access that information.

   Determine whether the disclosed information clearly explains the criteria the institution uses to make transfer decisions and any articulation arrangements the institution has with other institutions. Note whether the institution appropriately lists its articulation agreements with other institutions on its website or elsewhere. The information the institution provides should include any program-specific articulation agreements in place and should clearly identify program-specific articulation agreements as such. Also, the information the institution provides should include whether the articulation agreement anticipates that the institution under Commission review: 1) accepts credit from the other institution(s) in the articulation agreement; 2) sends credits to the other institution(s) in the articulation agreements that it accepts; or 3) both offers and accepts credits with the other institution(s).

4. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • The college discloses its transfer-in policies. Types of transfer credit may include AP courses, college courses, foreign language retroactive credit, experiential portfolio, military credit, challenge exams, and CLEP exams.

   • On the college’s transfer opportunities page, a list of partnerships is shown along with links. In some cases, the link will take you to an articulation agreement for a specific program at a partnering college with either Madison College or the Wisconsin Technical College System. In some cases, the link will take you to a transfer guide for Madison College. In other cases, the link will take you to general transfer information that requires the student to contact the partnering college for more information. And, in some further cases, the links are broken.

   • The college is currently migrating to a new website which will be launched in May 2016. Broken links on the website are a result of this migration and the college is addressing the broken links. Administration and staff were attentive to this issue when discussed by the team and the college will address the issue.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Practices for Verification of Student Identity

The institution has demonstrated that it verifies the identity of students who participate in courses or programs provided to the student through distance or correspondence education and appropriately discloses additional fees related to verification to students and to protect their privacy.

1. Determine how the institution verifies that the student who enrolls in a course is the same student who submits assignments, takes exams, and earns a final grade. Consider whether the institution’s approach respects student privacy.

2. Check that any fees related to verification and not included in tuition are explained to the students prior to enrollment in distance courses (e.g., a proctoring fee paid by students on the day of the proctored exam).

3. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • All students must create a student account that includes an ID number, a username, and a password. The username and password is needed to enroll and participate in online courses.

   • An addition tuition charge of $10 per credit is charged for online courses. This charge is disclosed on the Tuition & Fees page.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Title IV Program Responsibilities

The institution has presented evidence on the required components of the Title IV Program.

This requirement has several components the institution and team must address:

• General Program Requirements. The institution has provided the Commission with information about the fulfillment of its Title IV program responsibilities, particularly findings from any review activities by the Department of Education. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area.

• Financial Responsibility Requirements. The institution has provided the Commission with information about the Department’s review of composite ratios and financial audits. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area. (Note that the team should also be commenting under Criterion Five if an institution has significant issues with financial responsibility as demonstrated through ratios that are below acceptable levels or other financial responsibility findings by its auditor.)

• Default Rates. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its three year default rate. It has a responsible program to work with students to minimize default rates. It has, as necessary, addressed any issues the Department raised regarding the institution’s fulfillment of its responsibilities in this area. Note for 2012 and thereafter institutions and teams should be using the three-year default rate based on revised default rate data published by the Department in September 2012; if the institution does not provide the default rate for three years leading up to the comprehensive evaluation visit, the team should contact Commission staff.

• Campus Crime Information, Athletic Participation and Financial Aid, and Related Disclosures. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its disclosures. It has demonstrated, and the team has reviewed, the institution’s policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations.

• Student Right to Know. The institution has provided the Commission with information about its disclosures. It has demonstrated, and the team has reviewed, the institution’s policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations. The disclosures are accurate and provide appropriate information to students. (Note that the team should also be commenting under Criterion One if the team determines that disclosures are not accurate or appropriate.)

• Satisfactory Academic Progress and Attendance. The institution has provided the Commission with information about policies and practices for ensuring compliance with these regulations. The institution has demonstrated that the policies and practices meet state or federal requirements and that the institution is appropriately applying these policies and practices to students. In most cases, teams should verify that these policies exist and are available to students, typically in the course catalog or student handbook. Note that the Commission does not necessarily require that the institution take attendance but does anticipate that institutional attendance policies will provide information to students about attendance at the institution.

• Contractual Relationships. The institution has presented a list of its contractual relationships related to its academic program and evidence of its compliance with Commission policies requiring notification or approval for contractual relationships (If the team learns that the institution has a contractual relationship that may require Commission approval and has not received Commission approval the team must require that the institution complete and file the change request form as soon as possible. The team should direct the institution to review the Contractual Change Application on the Commission’s web site for more information.)

• Consortial Relationships. The institution has presented a list of its consortial relationships related to its academic program and evidence of its compliance with Commission policies requiring notification or approval for consortial relationships. (If the team learns that the institution has a consortial relationship that may require Commission approval and has not received Commission approval the team must require that the institution complete and file the form as soon as possible. The team should direct the institution to review the Consortial Change Application on the Commission’s web site for more information.)

1. Review all of the information that the institution discloses having to do with its Title IV program responsibilities.

2. Determine whether the Department has raised any issues related to the institution’s compliance or whether the institution’s auditor in the A-133 has raised any issues about the institution’s compliance as well as look to see how carefully and effectively the institution handles its Title IV responsibilities.

3. If an institution has been cited or is not handling these responsibilities effectively, indicate that finding within the federal compliance portion of the team report and whether the institution appears to be moving forward with corrective action that the Department has determined to be appropriate.

4. If issues have been raised with the institution’s compliance, decide whether these issues relate to the institution’s ability to satisfy the Criteria for Accreditation, particularly with regard to whether its disclosures to students are candid and complete and demonstrate appropriate integrity (Core Component 2.A and 2.B).

5. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • The Federal Compliance Review panel reviewed the 2014-15 and 2013-14 Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and notes that the auditor, in its opinion statement, found the financial statements of Madison College to be presented fairly. Further, the auditor did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that might be considered material weaknesses.

   • Madison College has satisfactorily addressed the A-133 requirements per the US Department of Education.

   • The FY2012 3-Year Default Rate was 15 which places Madison College at the upper limit for classification as an institution with a low official cohort default rate.

   • Campus crime statistics were reviewed for the years 2012 through 2014. Incidents related to burglaries and drug arrests at Truax, located in an urban setting, were noted.

   • The college disclosed that a gender bias complaint was made in 2012 that has subsequently resulted in a resolution agreement with the Office of Civil Rights. The panel reviewed the athletics participation data available in the Equity in Athletics Data Analysis Cutting Tool (Office of Postsecondary Education) and the Title IX/Gender Equity Self-Assessment Project prepared by the Madison College athletic department.

   • Student right to know information is adequately disclosed including costs of attendance and graduation and completion rates.

   • Satisfactory academic progress information is disclosed along with the method used in calculating it. Class attendance is the responsibility of the student. “Policies for attendance . . . are either outlined in the syllabus for each course or otherwise communicated by the instructor/program.”

   • No contractual or consortial relationships are presently used by Madison College.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Required Information for Students and the Public

_√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

Comments:

1. Verify that the institution publishes fair, accurate, and complete information on the following topics: the calendar, grading, admissions, academic program requirements, tuition and fees, and refund policies.

2. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   • All relevant information is disclosed in the Student Planner & Handbook and online.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Advertising and Recruitment Materials and Other Public Information

The institution has documented that it provides accurate, timely and appropriately detailed information to current and prospective students and the public about its accreditation status with the Commission and other agencies as well as about its programs, locations and policies.

1. Review the institution’s disclosure about its accreditation status with the Commission to determine whether the information it provides is accurate and complete, appropriately formatted and contains the Commission’s web address.

2. Review institutional disclosures about its relationship with other accrediting agencies for accuracy and for appropriate consumer information, particularly regarding the link between specialized/professional accreditation and the licensure necessary for employment in many professional or specialized areas.

3. Review the institution’s catalog, brochures, recruiting materials, and information provided by the institution’s advisors or counselors to determine whether the institution provides accurate information to current and prospective students about its accreditation, placement or licensure, program requirements, etc.

4. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements. See the underlined comment in the second bullet below.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • A working mark of affiliation is displayed on the college’s website.

   • Specialized accreditations are listed on the accreditations, approvals, memberships & partnerships page but the individual accreditations are not linked to the accrediting organization. On the program pages, the accreditations are noted but only some of the accreditations are linked.

   • The visiting team discussed the matter of accreditor link and learned from the college that as it migrates to a new website in May 2016, special attention will be given to ensure that specialized accreditation links on program pages will link to the accrediting organization.

   • The team reviewed program related brochures and the institution provides information about accreditation, placement or licensure and program requirements on brochures. The college does not provide institutional accreditation information on all brochures, but it is included on major documents such as the annual report and view book.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Review of Student Outcome Data

1. Review the student outcome data the institution collects to determine whether it is appropriate and sufficient based on the kinds of academic programs it offers and the students it serves.

2. Determine whether the institution uses this information effectively to make decisions about academic programs and requirements and to determine its effectiveness in achieving its educational objectives.

3. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • The college conducts various tracking of retention and persistence which informs staff and faculty on matters related to improvement. As an institution that participates in AQIP, projects have been described in the college’s systems portfolios.

   • The college has embarked on a state reporting requirement for technical program students. Data collection has been initiated in three programs but, because of the newness of the process, no assessments have been completed. The panel was able to review the basic structure of the process and read about some of the milestone activities.

   • The team was provided the college’s new program research and development five step process which includes review of data collected and evaluated to identify next step action. The college’s program analysis instrument was also provided. There is visible evidence of a culture of data informed decision making with processes in place to collect and analyze program metrics, student persistence, retention and success. Faculty and work groups are utilizing data to implement program improvements.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Standing with State and Other Accrediting Agencies

The institution has documented that it discloses accurately to the public and the Commission its relationship with any other specialized, professional or institutional accreditor and with all governing or coordinating bodies in states in which the institution may have a presence.

The team has considered any potential implications for accreditation by the Higher Learning Commission of sanction or loss of status by the institution with any other accrediting agency or loss of authorization in any state.

Important note: If the team is recommending initial or continued status, and the institution is now or has been in the past five years under sanction or show-cause with, or has received an adverse action (i.e., withdrawal, suspension, denial, or termination) from, any other federally recognized specialized or institutional accreditor or a state entity, then the team must explain the sanction or adverse action of the other agency in the body of the Assurance Section of the Team Report and provide its rationale for recommending Commission status in light of this action. In addition, the team must contact the staff liaison immediately if it learns that the institution is at risk of losing its degree authorization or lacks such authorization in any state in which the institution meets state presence requirements.

1. Review the information, particularly any information that indicates the institution is under sanction or show-cause or has had its status with any agency suspended, revoked, or terminated, as well as the reasons for such actions.

2. Determine whether this information provides any indication about the institution’s capacity to meet the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation. Should the team learn that the institution is at risk of losing, or has lost, its degree or program authorization in any state in which it meets state presence requirements, it should contact the Commission staff liaison immediately.

3. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • The panel reviewed the accreditation status of eighteen specialized accreditations and/or certifications. In seventeen cases, the panel saw either the approval letter or a copy of the certificate. In the case of Ophthalmic Clinical Assistant, the college is currently accredited but submitted additional information needed for reaffirmation. The panel assumes that the college is now awaiting the decision.

The team was provided a correspondence from the Commission on Accreditation of Ophthalmic Medical Programs sent to the college on February 5, 2016. The document stated that continuing accreditation is awarded with the recommendation of a change of wording on the “Clinical Experience I” to state the rotation is in ophthalmology clinic setting not optometric. The next comprehensive evaluation of the program is scheduled to occur in 2019.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Public Notification of Opportunity to Comment

The institution has made an appropriate and timely effort to solicit third party comments. The team has evaluated any comments received and completed any necessary follow-up on issues raised in these comments. Note that if the team has determined that any issues raised by third-party comment relate to the team’s review of the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation, it must discuss this information and its analysis in the body of the Assurance Section of the Team Report.

1. Review information about the public disclosure of the upcoming visit, including sample announcements, to determine whether the institution made an appropriate and timely effort to notify the public and seek comments.

2. Evaluate the comments to determine whether the team needs to follow-up on any issues through its interviews and review of documentation during the visit process.

3. Check the appropriate response that reflects the team’s conclusions:

   _√_ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution to meet the Commission’s requirements but recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team has reviewed this component of federal compliance and has found the institution not to meet the Commission’s requirements and recommends Commission follow-up.

   ___ The team also has comments that relate to the institution’s compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation. See Criterion (insert appropriate reference).

   Comments:

   • Madison College posted public notice of opportunity to comment in five newspapers and on its website. It supplied the team with a file containing the comments that were submitted in response to the notice. The comments were reviewed by the team and discussed with college representatives satisfactorily.

Additional monitoring, if any: None

Institutional Materials Related to Federal Compliance Reviewed by the Panel

Provide a list materials reviewed here:

• Federal Compliance Filing – MATC

• Articulation Agreement List – MATC

• Schedule of Classes by Campus/Location (Fall 2015 & Spring 2015) – MATC

• Schedule of Classes Verification/Monitoring Report (Spring 2015) – MATC

• Schedule of Classes Verification/Monitoring Report (Fall 2015) - MATC

• 2015-2016 Degree Credit Calendar – MATC

• 2016-17 Degree Credit Calendar – MATC

• 2013-2014 Catalog – MATC

• 2014-2015 Catalog – MATC

• Estimated Fees 2015-2016 and 204 Average Monthly Salary – MATC

• Fiscal Year 2015-16 Program Fee Rates and Out-of-State Tuition Rates – WTCS

• Student Account Creation – MATC

• Tuition & Fees (2015-2016) – MATC

• Madison College Student Planner & Handbook 2015-2016 – MATC

• The Road to Madison College (Fall) – MATC

• The Road to Madison College (Spring) – MATC

• Madison College HLC Student Complaints Log Supplemental Documentation (03/15/2016) – MATC

• Day 1 Participation Data - 2013-2016 – MATC

• Annual Security Report 2014 – MATC

• Campus Crime Information 2015-16 – MATC Public Safety Department Services

• FY2010 Cohort Default Rate Notification Letter – US Department of Education

• FY2011 Cohort Default Rate Notification Letter – US Department of Education

• FY2012 Cohort Default Rate Notification Letter – US Department of Education

• Audit Review Letter (09/29/2015) – US Department of Education

• Satisfactory Academic Progress – MATC

• Class Attendance – MATC

• Graduate Analysis Cube (# of Program Graduates) 2013 & 2014 – MATC

• Student Outcome Data and Program Review (letter dated 03/17/2016) – T. Casper

• Program Student Retention Outcome Trends by Plan (2014-2016) – MATC

• Student Retention and Persistence (Electronics – Fall 2013) – MATC

• Student Retention and Persistence (Marketing – Fall 2013) – MATC

• Student Retention and Persistence (Radiography – Fall 2013) – MATC

• An Introduction to Madison College’s Program Analysis Instrument – A. Tambone

• Summary of Technical Skills Attainment (3 programs, 2016) – MATC

• Summary of Milestone Activity (3 programs, 2016) – MATC

• Summary of TSA and Milestone Activity by Student by Program (3 programs, 2016) – MATC

• Detailed Milestone Activity by Student by Program (3 programs, 2016) – MATC

• Milestone Attempts by Student by Class (3 programs, 2016) – MATC

• Program Accreditations or Approvals & Certifications – MATC

• Degrees & Certificates – MATC

• Programs & Classes – MATC

• HLC 2016 Comprehensive Quality Review (Highlights Report) – MATC

• The Equity in Athletics Data Analysis Cutting Tool for MATC – Office of Postsecondary Education

• Title IX/Gender Equity Self-Assessment Report (03/12/2014) – MATC Athletic Department

• 2015 Employee Handbook – MATC

• Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 – MATC

• Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2015 and 2014 – MATC

• Transfer Opportunities – College/University – MATC

• Transfer Contracts (UW-Madison and UW-Whitewater) – MATC

• Types of Transfer Credit - MATC

Institutional Materials Related to Federal Compliance Reviewed by the Team

Provide a list materials reviewed here:

• Annual Report 2015, Madison College

• Class Schedules

• Correspondence from Commission on Accreditation of Ophthalmic Medical Programs

• Facts at a Glance Brochure

• New Program Research and Development Five Step Process

• Madison College 2015-college publication, view book for students and the public

• Program Analysis Instrument

• Program brochures representative of schools, career pathways, associate degrees, diplomas and certificates

  • Applied Science, Engineering and Technology

    • Automotive Technology

    • Civil Engineering Technology

    • Mechanical Design Technology

  • Business and Applied Arts

    • Accounting, Business Management

    • CISCO Certified Networking Associate (CCNA)

    • Human Resource Management

    • Meeting and Event Management

    • Mobile Marketing (Social Media)

  • Health Education

    • Associate Degree Nursing

    • Dental Hygienist

    • Health Administrative and Insurance Certificate

    • Optometric Technician

    • Nursing Assistant

  • Human and Protective Services

    • Early Childhood Education

    • Fire Protection Technician and Paramedic Technician

  • Paralegal

  • Therapeutic Massage

• Recruitment packet

  • College View Book

  • College Resources for Prospective Students reference sheet

  • The Road to Madison College reference sheets for fall and spring

  • Bridge Program information

  • Experience Madison College postcard

  • Various program brochures

Appendix

Team Worksheet for Evaluating an Institution’s Program Length and Tuition,
Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours

Institution under review: Madison Area Technical College

Part 1: Program Length and Tuition
Instructions

The institution has documented that it has credit hour assignments and degree program lengths within the range of good practice in higher education and that tuition is consistent across degree programs (or that there is a rational basis for any program-specific tuition).

Review the “Worksheet for Use by Institutions on the Assignment of Credit Hours and on Clock Hours” as well as the course catalog and other attachments required for the institutional worksheet.

Worksheet on Program Length and Tuition

1. Answer the Following Questions

   Are the institution’s degree program requirements within the range of good practice in higher education and contribute to an academic environment in which students receive a rigorous and thorough education?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Comments:

   Madison Area Technical College lists graduation requirements for the associate degrees at a minimum of 60 semester credits with the majority of associate degree programs ranging from 65- 70 credit hours. The technical diploma offerings have a much broader range of credit hours based on the specific technical skill and knowledge. The technical diploma programs have a minimum of two technical credits and can go up to 70 technical credits depending on specific area.

   Are the institution’s tuition costs across programs within the range of good practice in higher education and contribute to an academic environment in which students receive a rigorous and thorough education?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Comments:

2. Recommend Commission Follow-up, if appropriate

   Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s program length and tuition practices?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Rationale:

   No additional follow up is needed in this area as the offerings all fall within standard practice length of time and tuition pricing.

   Identify the type of Commission monitoring required and the due date:

Part 2: Assignment of Credit Hours
Instructions

In assessing the appropriateness of the credit allocations provided by the institution the team should complete the following steps:

1. Review the Worksheet completed by the institution, which provides information about an institution’s academic calendar and an overview of credit hour assignments across institutional offerings and delivery formats, and the institution’s policy and procedures for awarding credit hours. Note that such policies may be at the institution or department level and may be differentiated by such distinctions as undergraduate or graduate, by delivery format, etc.

2. Identify the institution’s principal degree levels and the number of credit hours for degrees at each level. The following minimum number of credit hours should apply at a semester institution:

   • Associate’s degrees = 60 hours

   • Bachelor’s degrees = 120 hours

   • Master’s or other degrees beyond the Bachelor’s = at least 30 hours beyond the Bachelor’s degree

   • Note that one quarter hour = .67 semester hour

   • Any exceptions to this requirement must be explained and justified.

3. Scan the course descriptions in the catalog and the number of credit hours assigned for courses in different departments at the institution.

   • At semester-based institutions courses will be typically be from two to four credit hours (or approximately five quarter hours) and extend approximately 14-16 weeks (or approximately 10 weeks for a quarter). The description in the catalog should indicate a course that is appropriately rigorous and has collegiate expectations for objectives and workload. Identify courses/disciplines that seem to depart markedly from these expectations.

   • Institutions may have courses that are in compressed format, self-paced, or otherwise alternatively structured. Credit assignments should be reasonable. (For example, as a full- time load for a traditional semester is typically 15 credits, it might be expected that the norm for a full-time load in a five-week term is 5 credits; therefore, a single five-week course awarding 10 credits would be subject to inquiry and justification.)

   • Teams should be sure to scan across disciplines, delivery mode, and types of academic activities.

   • Federal regulations allow for an institution to have two credit-hour awards: one award for Title IV purposes and following the above federal definition and one for the purpose of defining progression in and completion of an academic program at that institution. Commission procedure also permits this approach.

4. Scan course schedules to determine how frequently courses meet each week and what other scheduled activities are required for each course. Pay particular attention to alternatively-structured or other courses with particularly high credit hours for a course completed in a short period of time or with less frequently scheduled interaction between student and instructor.

5. Sampling. Teams will need to sample some number of degree programs based on the headcount at the institution and the range of programs it offers.

   • At a minimum, teams should anticipate sampling at least a few programs at each degree level.

   • For institutions with several different academic calendars or terms or with a wide range of academic programs, the team should expand the sample size appropriately to ensure that it is paying careful attention to alternative format and compressed and accelerated courses.

   • Where the institution offers the same course in more than one format, the team is advised to sample across the various formats to test for consistency.

   • For the programs the team sampled, the team should review syllabi and intended learning outcomes for several of the courses in the program, identify the contact hours for each course, and expectations for homework or work outside of instructional time.

   • The team should pay particular attention to alternatively-structured and other courses that have high credit hours and less frequently scheduled interaction between the students and the instructor.

   • Provide information on the samples in the appropriate space on the worksheet.

6. Consider the following questions:

   • Does the institution’s policy for awarding credit address all the delivery formats employed by the institution?

   • Does that policy address the amount of instructional or contact time assigned and homework typically expected of a student with regard to credit hours earned?

   • For institutions with courses in alternative formats or with less instructional and homework time than would be typically expected, does that policy also equate credit hours with intended learning outcomes and student achievement that could be reasonably achieved by a student in the timeframe allotted for the course?

   • Is the policy reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)

   • If so, is the institution’s assignment of credit to courses reflective of its policy on the award of credit?

7. If the answers to the above questions lead the team to conclude that there may be a problem with the credit hours awarded the team should recommend the following:

   • If the problem involves a poor or insufficiently-detailed institutional policy, the team should call for a revised policy as soon as possible by requiring a monitoring report within no more than one year that demonstrates the institution has a revised policy and evidence of implementation.

   • If the team identifies an application problem and that problem is isolated to a few courses or single department or division or learning format, the team should call for follow-up activities (monitoring report or focused evaluation) to ensure that the problems are corrected within no more than one year.

   • If the team identifies systematic non-compliance across the institution with regard to the award of credit, the team should notify Commission staff immediately and work with staff to design appropriate follow-up activities. The Commission shall understand systematic noncompliance to mean that the institution lacks any policies to determine the award of academic credit or that there is an inappropriate award of institutional credit not in conformity with the policies established by the institution or with commonly accepted practices in higher education across multiple programs or divisions or affecting significant numbers of students.

Worksheet on Assignment of Credit Hours

1. Identify the Sample Courses and Programs Reviewed by the Team (see #5 of instructions in completing this section) The following sample of courses and syllabi were reviewed:

   • Cost Management 10-101-125 4 credit hours

   • Management Accounting 10-101-118 4 credit hours

   • Written Communications 10-801-195 3 credit hours

   • Electrical Systems 10-070-176 5 credit hours

   • General College Physics 1 20-806-221 5 credit hours

   • Architectural Design Studio 10-614-145 4 credit hours

   • Microbiology 20-806-274 5 credit hours

   • Elective Course in Nursing 5 credit hours

   • Project Management Coordination 10-106-186 2 credits

   • Basic Sheet Metal Repair and Welding Fundamentals 32-405-301 5 credits

The following programs of study were also closely reviewed:

• Associate Degree—Nursing

• Nursing Assistant

• Practical Nursing

• Associate Degree—Accounting

• Associate Degree--Dental Hygienist

• Associate Degree--Finance

• Associate Degree--Early Childhood Education

1. Answer the Following Questions
   1. ​Institutional Policies on Credit Hours

      Does the institution’s policy for awarding credit address all the delivery formats employed by the institution? (Note that for this question and the questions that follow an institution may have a single comprehensive policy or multiple policies.)
      
      _√_ Yes ___No

      Comments:
      
      Yes, the assignment of credit award hours for face to face, laboratory, non-traditional, simulated or actual occupational experience, as well as on the job experience were all provided and within standard practices. The 4-5 credit hour courses all had lab or field experiences which extended hours to justify the higher credit offering.
      
      Does that policy relate the amount of instructional or contact time provided and homework typically expected of a student to the credit hours awarded for the classes offered in the delivery formats offered by the institution? (Note that an institution’s policy must go beyond simply stating that it awards credit solely based on assessment of student learning and should also reference instructional time.)
      
      _√_ Yes ___No

      Comments:
      
      Yes, the definition for the credit hour award extends to expected work both inside and outside of the classroom and meets standard practice guidelines. The assignment of credits at Madison Area Technical College is based upon 50 minute instructional periods within a 16-week semester term. One associate degree or technical diploma credit is granted for a minimum of a 50-minute period of faculty/student instruction over a 16-week semester, with another two hours of student effort outside of the classroom. Madison Area Technical College also breaks out the equivalent hours for Apprenticeships instruction, which is a different calculation. The calculation for 1 credit hour award of Apprenticeship (or on-the-job experience) equals 28-36 hours of instruction. Madison Area Technical College also hosts non degree continuing education for which 1 credit hour award equals 39-40 hours of instruction.
      
      For institutions with non-traditional courses in alternative formats or with less instructional and homework time than would be typically expected, does that policy equate credit hours with intended learning outcomes and student achievement that could be reasonably achieved by a student in the timeframe and utilizing the activities allotted for the course?
      
      _√_ Yes ___No

      Comments:
      
      Is the policy reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)
      
      _√_ Yes ___No

      Comments:

   2. Application of Policies
      
      Are the course descriptions and syllabi in the sample academic programs reviewed by the team appropriate and reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of credit? (Note that the Commission will expect that credit hour policies at public institutions that meet state regulatory requirements or are dictated by the state will likely meet federal definitions as well.)
      
      _√_ Yes ___No
      
      Comments:
      
      Are the learning outcomes in the sample reviewed by the team appropriate to the courses and programs reviewed and in keeping with the institution’s policy on the award of credit?
      
      _√_ Yes ___No
      
      Comments:
      
      Yes, all sample syllabi were appropriate and in keeping with Madison Area Technical College’s credit hour award policy.
      
      If the institution offers any alternative delivery or compressed format courses or programs, were the course descriptions and syllabi for those courses appropriate and reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of academic credit?
      
      _√_ Yes ___No
      
      Comments:
      
      If the institution offers alternative delivery or compressed format courses or programs, are the learning outcomes reviewed by the team appropriate to the courses and programs reviewed and in keeping with the institution’s policy on the award of credit? Are the learning outcomes reasonably capable of being fulfilled by students in the time allocated to justify the allocation of credit?
      
      _√_ Yes ___No
      
      Comments:
      
      Is the institution’s actual assignment of credit to courses and programs across the institution reflective of its policy on the award of credit and reasonable and appropriate within commonly accepted practice in higher education?
      
      _√_ Yes ___No
      
      Comments:

   3. Recommend Commission Follow-up, If Appropriate
      Review the responses provided in this section. If the team has responded “no” to any of the questions above, the team will need to assign Commission follow-up to assure that the institution comes into compliance with expectations regarding the assignment of credit hours.

      Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s credit hour policies and practices?

      _√_ Yes ___No

      Rationale:

      Identify the type of Commission monitoring required and the due date:

   4. Identify and Explain Any Findings of Systematic Non-Compliance in One or More Educational Programs with Commission Policies Regarding the Credit Hour

      None found

Part 3: Clock Hours

Does the institution offer any degree or certificate programs in clock hours?

_√_ Yes ___No

Does the institution offer any degree or certificate programs that must be reported to the Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes even though students may earn credit hours for graduation from these programs?

_√_ Yes ___No

If the answer to either question is “Yes,” complete this part of the form.

Instructions

This worksheet is not intended for teams to evaluate whether an institution has assigned credit hours relative to contact hours in accordance with the Carnegie definition of the credit hour. This worksheet solely addresses those programs reported to the Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes.

Complete this worksheet only if the institution offers any degree or certificate programs in clock hours OR that must be reported to the U.S. Department of Education in clock hours for Title IV purposes even though students may earn credit hours for graduation from these programs. Non-degree programs subject to clock hour requirements (an institution is required to measure student progress in clock hours for federal or state purposes or for graduates to apply for licensure) are not subject to the credit hour definitions per se but will need to provide conversions to semester or quarter hours for Title IV purposes. Clock-hour programs might include teacher education, nursing, or other programs in licensed fields.

For these programs Federal regulations require that they follow the federal formula listed below. If there are no deficiencies identified by the accrediting agency in the institution’s overall policy for awarding semester or quarter credit, accrediting agency may provide permission for the institution to provide less instruction provided that the student’s work outside class in addition to direct instruction meets the applicable quantitative clock hour requirements noted below.

Federal Formula for Minimum Number of Clock Hours of Instruction (34 CFR §668.8)

1 semester or trimester hour must include at least 37.5 clock hours of instruction

1 quarter hour must include at least 25 clock hours of instruction

Note that the institution may have a lower rate if the institution’s requirement for student work outside of class combined with the actual clock hours of instruction equals the above formula provided that a semester/trimester hour includes at least 30 clock hours of actual instruction and a quarter hour include at least 20 semester hours.

Worksheet on Clock Hours

1. Answer the Following Questions

   Does the institution’s credit to clock hour formula match the federal formula?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Comments:

   If the credit to clock hour conversion numbers are less than the federal formula, indicate what specific requirements there are, if any, for student work outside of class?

   Did the team determine that the institution’s credit hour policies are reasonable within the federal definition as well as within the range of good practice in higher education? (Note that if the team answers “No” to this question, it should recommend follow-up monitoring in section C below.)

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Comments:

   Did the team determine in reviewing the assignment of credit to courses and programs across the institution that it was reflective of the institution’s policy on the award of credit and reasonable and appropriate within commonly accepted practice in higher education?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Comments:

2. Does the team approve variations, if any, from the federal formula in the institution’s credit to clock hour conversion?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   (Note that the team may approve a lower conversion rate than the federal rate as noted above provided the team found no issues with the institution’s policies or practices related to the credit hour and there is sufficient student work outside of class as noted in the instructions.)

3. Recommend Commission Follow-up, If Appropriate

   Is any Commission follow-up required related to the institution’s clock hour policies and practices?

   _√_ Yes ___No

   Rationale:

   Identify the type of Commission monitoring required and the due date:

Appendix D

Multi-Campus Reports

Name of Institution: Madison Area Technical College
Name and Address of Branch Campus: Commercial Avenue Campus, 2125 Commercial Avene, Madison WI
Date and Duration of Visit: March 29, 2016; 2.25 hours
Reviewer(s): JoAnn Simser

1. Campus Overview

   Provide a brief description of the scope and operations of the campus. Include information about consortial or contractual arrangements, if applicable.

   The campus is home to 18 apprenticeship programs and to Associate in Applied Science, diploma and certificate programs, in such areas as welding, machining, automotive and diesel mechanics, agricultural equipment, construction, electrician, and plumbing. Each program has an advisory board with at least three members from industry.Students may enroll in transfer courses in the Liberal Arts and Sciences program provided onsite, online and/or at the nearby main Truax campus, available by shuttle (10 minutes away). The educational portion of the apprenticeship is provided by the college and the experiential component is provided by the employer, employer associations or labor groups. The apprenticeship program is administered through coordination with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. Students completing an apprenticeship program may be awarded up to 39 college credits and complete 21 liberal arts and science credits towards competion of an AAS Technical Studies--Journey Worker program.

2. History, Planning, and Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the effectiveness of the institution’s planning, governance and oversight processes at the campus and in relationship to the broader systems of the institution, particularly as they relate to enrollment, budgeting, and resource allocation at the institution.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The metro campus is an integral part of the college's strategic planning, shared governance, student services, budgeting, and resource allocation systems. Administrative oversight is provided by the Dean of the Applied Science, Engineering and Technology. Day-to-day operations are managed by the Associate Dean. Student services are provided through the Student Success and Development Division. Full-ime and adunct faculty serve on college-wide committees and work groups, providing collaboration and campus input. In addition to college resources, the campus benefits from Advisory Board donations, partnerships with local employers, developers, associations, and agencies, and grants (e.g., NSF Renewable Energy, Blueprint for Prosperity to support Construction and the TAACCT grant for Manufacturing).

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

    

   
   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

    

   
   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

3. Facilities and Technology

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s facilities and technology at the campus and their suitability to the needs of the students, staff and faculty, as well as the educational offerings. Consider, in particular, classrooms and laboratories (size, maintenance, temperature, etc.); faculty and administrative offices (site, visibility, privacy for meetings, etc.); parking or access to public transit; bookstore or text purchasing services; security; handicapped access; and other (food or snack services, study and meeting areas, etc.).

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The campus consists of two buildings: Building A consists of classrooms; hands-on program labs (e.g. welding, machining, and firearms shooting range), faculty and administrators offices, conference rooms, and the Adult Learning Center. Building B houses the apprenticeship program classrooms and labs and the Construction and Remodeling Program. Advisory board input assures that students have access to current technology. The campus recently used the college's Interest-based Problem Solving Process to redesign the construction and remodeling space with positive results for students. The college is incorporating additional space for students to learn team building and communication at the advice of program advisory board members. A shuttle transports students on a regular schedule between Commercial Avenue campus and the nearby main Truax campus. Students have access to an assessment center and staff for course placement and advising on campus. Student admission, registration, and support services designed to meet the students' needs are avialable to students at the main campus, online, and on the Commercial Avenue campus.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

4. Human Resources

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on appropriateness of faculty and staff qualifications, sufficiency of staff and faculty for the campus, and the processes for supporting and evaluating personnel at the campus. Consider the processes in place for selecting, training, and orienting faculty at the location, as well as the credentials of faculty dedicated to the campus and other faculty.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The campus uses the same policies, standards, and practices as the rest of the college, coordinated by the Human Resources Division, for hiring, selecting, and orienting full-time and part-time faculty and staff. Training is provided through the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, both online in alternative formats and at the beginning of each semester at the campus. Currently there are 12 full-time faculty and additional adjunct faculty, which vary by semester, depending upon program and course offerings. Qualifications and position descriptions are consistent with the rest of the college.The Dean of Applied Science, Engineering and Technolgy manages the process for hiring full-time faculty and the Associate Dean manages the processes for maintaining a pool of potential adjunct faculty and hiring adjunct faculty by semester. The Dean has mapped out the qualifications of all faculty, including those for faculty in dual credit programs, and is working with them to assure qualifications are met. The biggest challenge for dual credit faculty from secondary partners is the requirement for recent occupational experience, rather than degree requirements. The college intends to review the pool of adjunct faculty for relevancy and for qualifications to teach other courses.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

5. Student and Faculty Resources and Support

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the student and faculty services and academic resources at the campus, as well as the processes to evaluate, improve, and manage them. Consider, in particular, the level of student access (in person, by computer, by phone, etc.) to academic advising/placement, remedial/tutorial services, and library materials/services. Also, consider the level of access to admissions, registration/student records, financial aid, and job placement services, as well as attention to student concerns. Finally, consider the resources needed by faculty to provide the educational offerings.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   Students have access to an assessment center and to advising through the Adult Learning Center on campus and via shuttle to the library, student acheivement center, tutoring, disabilility, and student support services at the nearby main Truax campus. Student admission, registration, and support services that are designed to meet the student needs are provided at the main campus, online, and on the Commercial Avenue campus. Job placement services are provided through the Department of Workforce Development apprenticeship office on site and the career development office at the Truax campus.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

6. Educational Programs and Instructional Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s capacity to oversee educational offerings and instruction at the campus. Identify whether the institution has adequate controls in place to ensure that information presented to students is ample and accurate. Consider consistency of curricular expectations and policies, availability of courses needed for program and graduation requirements, performance of instructional duties, availability of faculty to students, orientation of faculty/professional development, and attention to student concerns.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The campus follows the same program requirements and course outlines as the rest of the college; these are available to students and faculty online through the intrasystem website. Faculty and program directors have served on statewide Wisconsin Technical College System committees to determine learner outcomes and tools to assess technical skill attainment; they are working with program advisory boards to validate the learner outcomes, and adjust curriculum and pilot technical skill assessments. Faculty are supervised and evaluated according to college practices and policies by the Dean of Applied Science, Engineering, and Technology and the Associate Dean. Orientation and professional development are provided by the Deans, Program Directors, and the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning. Faculty are available to students in hands-on labs, before-and-after class, and by appointment, on an ongoing basis.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

7. Evaluation and Assessment

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s processes to evaluate and improve the educational offerings of the campus and to assess and improve student learning, persistence, and completion sufficiently to maintain and improve academic quality at the campus. Consider, in particular, the setting of outcomes, the actual measurement of performance, and the analysis and use of data to maintain/improve quality. Identify how the processes at a campus are equivalent to those for assessment and evaluation on the main campus.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The campus uses the same assessmment of Core Workforce Skills and program learning outcomes as the rest of the college. Graduates of many programs have industry recognized credentials endorsed by the program advisory boards (e.g. OSHA, plumber and electrical licenses, Automotive Service Excellence and American Welding Society certifications). The college's institutional research unit tracks learning outcomes, persistance and completion and makes this information available to faculty and administration through the online Cognos system. Faculty have been involved in the development of a program assessment tool and use it and program advisory board recommendations to make program improvements. Programs are offerred in conjunction with business and industry needs and reflect regional labor market demand.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

8. Continuous Improvement

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements that demonstrate that the institution encourages and ensures continuous quality improvement at the campus. Consider in particular the institution's planning and evaluation processes that ensure regular review and improvement of the campus and ensure alignment of the branch campus with the mission and goals of the institution as a whole.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   Faculty and program directors serve on cross functional institution committees and workgroups providing collaboration and improvement strategies aligned with the mission, vision, and strategic initiatives. Faculty and program directors also serve on statewide committees and boards to provide input and garner resources from other sources to improve program quality.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

Name of Institution: Madison Area Technical College
Name and Address of Branch Campus: Portage Branch - Portage, Wisconsin Date and Duration of Visit: March 29; 3 hours
Reviewer(s): John Gratton

1. Campus Overview

   Provide a brief description of the scope and operations of the campus. Include information about consortial or contractual arrangements, if applicable.

   Madison Area Technical College maintains a branch campus in Portage, Wisconsin that is located about 45 miles north of the main campus in Madison. The Portage campus offers a diverse set of courses including welding and industrial maintenance as well as coursework leading to a transfer degree.

2. History, Planning, and Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the effectiveness of the institution’s planning, governance and oversight processes at the campus and in relationship to the broader systems of the institution, particularly as they relate to enrollment, budgeting, and resource allocation at the institution.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   Madison College involves the Portage Campus in its governance procedures with regular visits from the Executive Team and a board meeting held on the branch campus on a regular basis. The enrollment maintains a steady basis and the resource allocation is sufficient to maintain appropriate operations.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

3. Facilities and Technology

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s facilities and technology at the campus and their suitability to the needs of the students, staff and faculty, as well as the educational offerings. Consider, in particular, classrooms and laboratories (size, maintenance, temperature, etc.); faculty and administrative offices (site, visibility, privacy for meetings, etc.); parking or access to public transit; bookstore or text purchasing services; security; handicapped access; and other (food or snack services, study and meeting areas, etc.).

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Portage campus is a nice facility with well-equipped classrooms, a chemistry lab, and a biology. The faculty are provided appropriate office space and the administrative offices are very visible with consistent personnel on site. The technology provided is strong and helpful to students. The facility and the technology provided are commendable for a branch campus.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

4. Human Resources

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on appropriateness of faculty and staff qualifications, sufficiency of staff and faculty for the campus, and the processes for supporting and evaluating personnel at the campus. Consider the processes in place for selecting, training, and orienting faculty at the location, as well as the credentials of faculty dedicated to the campus and other faculty.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Portage campus maintains appropriately qualified full-time and adjunct faculty. The site is under the direction of a Madison College Dean, but also has a site administrator present at all times. The faculty and staff are required to complete their required training and orientation processes both at the main campus and at the Portage campus.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

5. Student and Faculty Resources and Support

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the student and faculty services and academic resources at the campus, as well as the processes to evaluate, improve, and manage them. Consider, in particular, the level of student access (in person, by computer, by phone, etc.) to academic advising/placement, remedial/tutorial services, and library materials/services. Also, consider the level of access to admissions, registration/student records, financial aid, and job placement services, as well as attention to student concerns. Finally, consider the resources needed by faculty to provide the educational offerings.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Portage Campus offers a wide range of student and faculty resources including a full-time advisor, a part-time Disability Services Coordinator,and office assistance. The campus maintains a small library and has a interlibrary loan program with the main campus. A bookstore is not present on campus but books are ordered from the main campus bookstore and are delivered overnight. Additionally, the Portage campus maintains a remedial and tutorial center to assist students in preparing for coursework.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

6. Educational Programs and Instructional Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s capacity to oversee educational offerings and instruction at the campus. Identify whether the institution has adequate controls in place to ensure that information presented to students is ample and accurate. Consider consistency of curricular expectations and policies, availability of courses needed for program and graduation requirements, performance of instructional duties, availability of faculty to students, orientation of faculty/professional development, and attention to student concerns.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   Madison College provides sound oversight of the educational programs offered at the Portage Campus. A variety of courses are offered via face-to-face, online, and enhanced ITV delivery. The campus displays a commitment to addressing student concerns. Additionally, the Portage campus faculty are provided professional development opportunities.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

7. Evaluation and Assessment

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s processes to evaluate and improve the educational offerings of the campus and to assess and improve student learning, persistence, and completion sufficiently to maintain and improve academic quality at the campus. Consider, in particular, the setting of outcomes, the actual measurement of performance, and the analysis and use of data to maintain/improve quality. Identify how the processes at a campus are equivalent to those for assessment and evaluation on the main campus.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Portage campus provides a student support and student learning facility to aid in student success initiatives. Data requests are provided in an expedient manner and the campus displays the same degree of quality as demonstrated on the main campus. The services provided to the Portage campus are in direct alignment to those services provided on the main campus.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

8. Continuous Improvement

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements that demonstrate that the institution encourages and ensures continuous quality improvement at the campus. Consider in particular the institution's planning and evaluation processes that ensure regular review and improvement of the campus and ensure alignment of the branch campus with the mission and goals of the institution as a whole.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Portage campus maintains sound planning and evaluation processes to ensure campus improvement. Campus personnel are aware of the mission and vision statements of the college and the Portage Campus operations are aligned very well with the institution.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

Name of Institution: Madison Area Technical College
Name and Address of Branch Campus: Reedsburg Campus - 300 Alexander Ave - Reedsburg, WI
Date and Duration of Visit: March 29, 2016; 1 hour Reviewer(s): Dr. Jody Tomanek

1. Campus Overview

   Provide a brief description of the scope and operations of the campus. Include information about consortial or contractual arrangements, if applicable.

   The Reedsburg Regional Campus of Madison College provides general education courses as well as programs in Accounting, Criminal Justice, Nursing, and Information Technology.

   Reedsburg also offers a number of student services including library services, student achivement center, advising, and disability support services.

2. History, Planning, and Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the effectiveness of the institution’s planning, governance and oversight processes at the campus and in relationship to the broader systems of the institution, particularly as they relate to enrollment, budgeting, and resource allocation at the institution.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Reedsburg regional campus is under the direction of a Regional Dean who oversees the planning and operations of the campus. In addition, there is an associate dean and operations manger. The three of them, together, are responsible for day-to-day operations at Reedsburg as well as program offerings and hiring of adjunct faculty.

   The Board of Governors for Madison College rotate its meetings to ensure that it has one meeting at the Reedsburg campus each year. One of the board members is a residence of Reedsburg.

   The Regional Dean is in regular contact with the main campus and there appears to be good communication among departments at Reedsburg and the main campus. This includes recruiting, budgeting, and resouce allocation.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

3. Facilities and Technology

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s facilities and technology at the campus and their suitability to the needs of the students, staff and faculty, as well as the educational offerings. Consider, in particular, classrooms and laboratories (size, maintenance, temperature, etc.); faculty and administrative offices (site, visibility, privacy for meetings, etc.); parking or access to public transit; bookstore or text purchasing services; security; handicapped access; and other (food or snack services, study and meeting areas, etc.).

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Reedsburg campus relies heavily on technology due to its rural location 90 miles outside of Madison. Two classrooms are dedicated spaces for teleconfernce courses that allow students to connect with classes at the main location. These teleconference rooms are pivitol for Reedsburg to offer a variety of courses for students. Classrooms are also set-up as engaged learning classrooms and the nursing labs are equipped with simulators on which nursing students can practice.

   There are general education classrooms, a biology lab that is fully equipped,a small library, a student achievement center, and a common area for students to congregrate. The Reedsburg campus is also positioned between a child care center and assisted living home that allow for partnerships to ensure students have acess to child care and practicum experiences.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

4. Human Resources

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on appropriateness of faculty and staff qualifications, sufficiency of staff and faculty for the campus, and the processes for supporting and evaluating personnel at the campus. Consider the processes in place for selecting, training, and orienting faculty at the location, as well as the credentials of faculty dedicated to the campus and other faculty.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Reedsburg campus is staffed with one dean, an associate dean, and an operations manager as the main administrative staff. The campus is also staffed with advisors, clerical staff, custodial staff, and full-time and adjunct faculty. All appropriate for the size and scope of the Reedsburg campus.

   The processes for selecting, training, and orienting faculty (both full-time and adjunct) are the same as at the main campus. This process was recently developed college-wide to ensure consistency across all campuses. Professional development opportunities are also offered at the Reedsburg campus for faculty and staff.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

5. Student and Faculty Resources and Support

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the student and faculty services and academic resources at the campus, as well as the processes to evaluate, improve, and manage them. Consider, in particular, the level of student access (in person, by computer, by phone, etc.) to academic advising/placement, remedial/tutorial services, and library materials/services. Also, consider the level of access to admissions, registration/student records, financial aid, and job placement services, as well as attention to student concerns. Finally, consider the resources needed by faculty to provide the educational offerings.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Reedsburg campus of Madison College offers a wide variety of services for faculty and students. This includes an advisor on location, a disability support counselor, student achievement center, library, financial aid, and ABE/GED courses. Students are able to take placement exams at the Reedsburg location and students can register on-site. Student concerns are addressed by the campus operations manager.

   Faculty at the Reedsburg campus also have access to professional development opportunities both in Reedsburg and at the main Truax campus in Madison. CETL staff and adjunct liasions also travel to visit the regional campus to address needs or concerns.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

6. Educational Programs and Instructional Oversight

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s capacity to oversee educational offerings and instruction at the campus. Identify whether the institution has adequate controls in place to ensure that information presented to students is ample and accurate. Consider consistency of curricular expectations and policies, availability of courses needed for program and graduation requirements, performance of instructional duties, availability of faculty to students, orientation of faculty/professional development, and attention to student concerns.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   The Reedsburg campus offers a handful of degree programs with the main degree being nursing. The facility is appropriate to the nursing program with dedicated classroom and lab space, as well as access to support courses for the nursing degree. The campus' proximity to an assisted living facility, located directly behind it, allows students easy access to a practicum experience. Curriculum offerd at the Reedsburg campus follows the same course syllabi as those at the main campus and the nursing program is accredited by ACEN.

   The Reedsburg campus also offers continuting edcuation courses and it is important to the campus dean that students at the Reedsburg campus receive the same education that they would at the main location.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

7. Evaluation and Assessment

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements on the institution’s processes to evaluate and improve the educational offerings of the campus and to assess and improve student learning, persistence, and completion sufficiently to maintain and improve academic quality at the campus. Consider, in particular, the setting of outcomes, the actual measurement of performance, and the analysis and use of data to maintain/improve quality. Identify how the processes at a campus are equivalent to those for assessment and evaluation on the main campus.

   The dean of the Reedsburg campus is committed to the expansion of educational offerings at this location. Faculty follow the same processes as faculty at the main Truax campus when it comes to assessment, student learning objectives, and the Core Workforce Skills. Members of the CETL and the college's curriculum coordinator stay in contact with faculty at the Reedsburg campus to ensure consistency across the departments in relation to the regional campuses.

   Additionally, faculty, staff, and administrators are active in the community and continually receive feedback from community members to ensure that the program offerings are compatible with the workforce needs in Reedsburg.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

8. Continuous Improvement

   Provide 2-3 evidentiary statements that demonstrate that the institution encourages and ensures continuous quality improvement at the campus. Consider in particular the institution's planning and evaluation processes that ensure regular review and improvement of the campus and ensure alignment of the branch campus with the mission and goals of the institution as a whole.

   Evidentiary Statements:

   To ensure continuous quality improcement at the campus, the president as well as college cabinet members routinely visit the Reedsburg campus. This alows the senior administration to make connections on campus and in the community, and help spread the message of AQIP. As part of the referendum vote in 2010, money was allocted for the regional campuses, including Reedsburg. This allowed for an addition to be built on the Reedsburg campus. These visits also allow faculty and staff to visit with senior administrators and understand the mission and goals of the institution. Faculty and staff have the opportunity to sit on college-wide committtes related to AQIP proejcts.

   Judgment of reviewer(s) (check one):

   The evidence indicates that the institution fulfills the expectations of the category.

   The evidence indicates that there are concerns related to the expectations of the category.

STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION STATUS WORKSHEET

INSTITUTION and STATE: Madison Area Technical College WI
TYPE OF REVIEW: Comprehensive Quality Review
DESCRIPTION OF REVIEW: A multi-campus visit will occur in conjunction with the Comprehensive Quality Review to Madison-Commercial Avenue Campus, 2125 Commercial Avenue, Madison, WI 53704; the Portage Campus at 330 W. Collins St. in Portage, WI, 53901; and the Reedsburg Campus at 300 Alexander Ave., Reedsburg, WI 53959. Comprehensive evaluation includes a federal compliance panel.
DATES OF REVIEW: 03/28/2016 - 03/30/2016
No Change in Statement of Affiliation Status

Nature of Organization
CONTROL: Public
RECOMMENDATION:
DEGREES AWARDED: Associates, Certificate
RECOMMENDATION: No Change

Conditions of Affiliation
STIPULATIONS ON AFFILIATION STATUS:
Prior Commission approval is required for substantive change as stated in Commission policy.
RECOMMENDATION: No Change
APPROVAL OF NEW ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS:
Prior Commission approval required.
RECOMMENDATION: No Change

Recommendations for the
STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION STATUS

APPROVAL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION DEGREES:
Approved for distance education courses and programs. The institution has not been approved for correspondence education.
RECOMMENDATION: No Change
ACCREDITATION ACTIVITIES:
AQIP, Comprehensive Quality Review: 03/28/2016
A multi-campus visit will occur in conjunction with the Comprehensive Quality Review to Madison-Commercial Avenue Campus, 2125 Commercial Avenue, Madison, WI 53704; the Portage Campus at 330 W. Collins St. in Portage, WI, 53901; and the Reedsburg Campus at 300 Alexander Ave., Reedsburg, WI 53959. Comprehensive evaluation includes a federal compliance panel.
AQIP, Systems Appraisal: 06/01/2019 AQIP, Systems Appraisal: 06/01/2023
Multi Campus Visits, Multi Campus Visit: 2015 - 2016
RECOMMENDATION:

Summary of Commission Review
YEAR OF LAST REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION: 2008 - 2009
YEAR FOR NEXT REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION: 2015 - 2016
RECOMMENDATION: 2025-2026

ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE WORKSHEET

INSTITUTION and STATE: 1694 Madison Area Technical College WI
TYPE OF REVIEW: AQIP: Comprehensive Quality Review
DESCRIPTION OF REVIEW: A multi-campus visit will occur in conjunction with the Comprehensive Quality Review to Madison-Commercial Avenue Campus, 2125 Commercial Avenue, Madison, WI 53704; the Portage Campus at 330 W. Collins St. in Portage, WI, 53901; and the Reedsburg Campus at 300 Alexander Ave., Reedsburg, WI 53959. Comprehensive evaluation includes a federal compliance panel.
No change to Organization Profile

Educational Programs
Programs leading to Undergraduate
Associates = 55 Program Distribution
Bachelors = 0 Program Distribution

Programs leading to Graduate
Doctors = 0 Program Distribution
Masters = 0 Program Distribution
Specialist = 0 Program Distribution

Certificate programs
Certificate = 37 Program Distribution
Recommended Change:
Off-Campus Activities:
In State - Present Activity

Campuses:
Fort Atkinson - Fort Atkinson, WI
Madison - Downtown Education Center - Madison, WI Madison - Commercial Avenue - Madison, WI Portage - Portage, WI
Reedsburg - Reedsburg, WI Watertown - Watertown, WI
Additional Locations:
MATC West - Madison, WI
Madison College South - Madison, WI

Recommended Change:
Out Of State - Present Activity
Campuses: None.
Additional Locations: None.
Recommended Change:
Out of USA - Present Activity
Campuses: None.
Additional Locations: None.
Recommended Change:
Distance Education Programs:
Present Offerings:
Associate 52.0401 Administrative Assistant and Secretarial Science, General A.A.S. in Administrative Professional Internet
Associate 52.0205 Operations Management and Supervision A.A.S. in Supervisory Management Internet
Certificate 11.0301 Data Processing and Data Processing Technology/Technician Certificate in Business Software Applications Specialist Internet
Certificate 51.0713 Medical Insurance Coding Specialist/Coder Certificate in Medical Coding Specialist Internet
Certificate 51.1802 Optometric Technician/Assistant Certificate in Optometric Technician Internet
Associate 52.0907 Meeting and Event Planning A.A.S. in Meeting and Event Management Internet
Associate 24.0101 Liberal Arts and Sciences/Liberal Studies Associate Degree in Arts - Online Internet
Associate 52.14 Marketing Marketing Online Associates Degree Internet
Recommended Change:
Correspondence Education Programs:
Present Offerings:
None.
Recommended Change:
Contractual Relationships:
Present Offerings:
None.
Recommended Change:
Consortial Relationships:
Present Offerings:
None.
Recommended Change:

Madison Area Technical College

2016 AQIP Systems Portfolio Addendum

Overview

In response to the 2013 Systems Portfolio of Madison Area Technical College (henceforth, the College), Higher Learning Commission reviewers identified opportunities for significant improvement in the following categories: 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 9. This addendum to the 2013 Systems Portfolio reviews efforts the College has made to improve upon these opportunities. This report also provides information reviewers identified as not existing or related to the aforementioned categories and components 2C, 2D, and 2E of Core Criterion 2.

Category 1: Helping Students Learn

1P17 – Determining that students have met learning and development expectations.

The College hired a full-time curriculum specialist in 2014 to lead the College’s efforts to create new processes to assess whether students have met College-wide student learning objectives and learning and development expectations associated with the student’s specific program.

The curriculum specialist created a video that presents a brief overview of the College’s work prior to 2014 regarding assessment of student learning and provides a general overview of the process that was engaged beginning in 2015 to address the issue of assessing student learning.

Identifying common student learning objectives – As referenced in the 2013 Systems Portfolio, during 2013 the College was updating its 2007 academic plan. This update included a review of the then titled eight “Core Abilities” related to common student learning objectives that were established in 1994.

To conduct this update, the College surveyed its program advisory board members (every program is required to have such a board) regarding the existing eight Core Abilities and their currency or appropriateness. [1] Over 350 individuals in 28 industries participated in the survey (an industry may be associated with multiple programs). The employers confirmed that these Core Abilities were still of great importance to the success of the employees they hire; a high-degree of proficiency in technical skills alone is not sufficient to an employee’s success in the workplace, according to the respondents. The College’s survey results were in-line with other national surveys examining the skills and knowledge employers desired in employees. See the academic plan for more details.

The College survey of its program advisory board members asked respondents to identify the amount of importance employers placed on each of the Core Abilities and their perception regarding the degree to which employees exhibited these competencies.From the survey, the College identified gaps between those competencies that employers valued the greatest, but which employees demonstrated the least amount of competence. [2] As part of this work, the College renamed Core Abilities as “Core Workforce Skills” to strengthen the internal focus on these skills being critical to the success of graduates in the workplace.

With an understanding of where gaps between performance and value of a skill existed, the College set about a process to determine how to assess these skills. Volunteer faculty members from across the College participated in workgroups that developed boundaries to articulate in a more granular fashion the desired skill to be obtained and how to assess the skill. The assessment rubric was tested repeatedly by faculty from multiple disciplines and adjusted. In fall 2015, participation in this assessment project was offered to more than 400 faculty members representing each school at the College providing degree credit programs. At this point, the participation of faculty is voluntary. The goal for spring 2016 is to confirm the effectiveness of the rubric, the ease of the data and artifact submission process, and assess how results are processed, prior to sending the all-faculty invitation for assessment participation in fall 2016.

Identifying program learning objectives – The curriculum consultant set as an initial project goal to analyze the currency and validity of existing program learning objectives. The consultant coordinated efforts with faculty, program directors, program advisory boards, and industry representatives to verify that learning objectives both aligned with the needs of industry and business and met state-wide curriculum standards, program accreditation standards, and transfer agreements. In 2014-15, 34 programs went through this process.

The objectives were selected according to performance-based design standards that answered the question: What skills need to be assessed? After skills were drafted by faculty, local industry representatives and program advisory boards determined if they matched expectations for the given occupation. Program faculty members then developed a crosswalk identifying where program learning objectives would be covered and assessed in each program course. A central repository was created for deans and faculty; it indicates what step in the assessment cycle a program is at and contains links to industry feedback, crosswalks, and rubrics. The College website and related program materials continue to be updated as the process unfolds.

1R2 – Performance results for common student learning and development objectives.

In fall 2015, 47 faculty members out of 400 that were invited, volunteered to assess whether students met, did not meet, or were not assessed on the various Core Workforce Skills [3]. Using a universal rubric, faculty selected a course and assignment, rated student demonstration of the skills, and submitted the results to the curriculum specialist. The process will be repeated annually with invitations going out to all faculty, rather than a subset as was done initially.

To support faculty with addressing identified skills gaps, a toolkit will be created to support new approaches in developing student performance related to the common learning objectives. In the future, the College will solicit program advisory board members to assess whether gaps between the perceived importance of a competency and the possession of the competency have improved and to identify any new emerging skills that employers believe employees should possess.

1R3 – Performance results for specific programs learning objectives.

In 2014-15, 34 programs (including less than one-year credentials, one- and two-year diplomas, and two-year degrees) validated their program learning objectives with industry and then identified specific courses where assessment of the learning objectives would occur. Starting in fall 2015, each semester faculty members will use the existing student information system (PeopleSoft) to record whether students are or are not meeting the program learning objectives. In 2016-17, aggregated student performance results will be accessible to faculty through the College’s reporting system (Cognos). Results will be shared with program advisory board members during regularly scheduled meetings. Program faculty, with support from the College’s curriculum specialist, are expected to annually analyze results and make curriculum adjustments as needed to support improved scores on the assessment.

In 2015-16, another 30 programs are expected to complete the validation process, create a cross-walk of the objectives to program courses, and identify specific courses where assessment of the learning objectives will occur. Thirty additional programs will undertake these same steps in 2016-17.

As student assessment results are documented, trends in performance are displayed over time in the College’s reporting system.Faculty will then be equipped to adjust curriculum based on real data and determine if curriculum changes were effective.

Category 2:Accomplishing Other Distinctive Objectives

2R3 – Comparative results for accomplishing distinctive objectives.

The response to the 2013 Systems Portfolio indicated that the College did not provide comparative results for its performance of continuing education and its work related to international education.

Continuing Education - The College provides two types of continuing education for individuals that are currently employed or seeking employment: professional development classes that are less than 24 hours of instruction and contract service training, typically delivered to a single employer at the worksite. Through the Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) data portal, the College can compare its performance to the 15 other WTCS colleges in the area of credits completed.

Based on the analyses below, Madison College provided the 6^th most amount of credits in professional development (Table 1) and the 4^th most amount of credits in employer paid training (Table 2) over the 3-year period examined.

Table 1

Table 2

International Education - The College uses multiple comparative measures to benchmark success and areas for improvement in international education including the following:

• CAS Standards: The Council for the Advancement of Standards (CAS) provides standards, guidelines and self-assessment tools for the measurement of international student programs and services.Beginning in the 2015-16 academic year, the College will implement an assessment cycle that identifies key areas of CAS standards for review, and will develop specific improvement responses in areas that are identified as targets for improvement.

• Forum on Education Abroad Standards of Best Practice: The Forum on Education Abroad (Forum EA) provides standards, guidelines, and self-assessment tools for the measurement of study abroad programs.Beginning in the 2015-16 academic year, the College will implement an assessment cycle that identifies key areas of Forum EA standards for review, and will develop specific improvement responses in areas that are revealed as targets for improvement.

• CCID Framework for Comprehensive Internationalization: Community Colleges for International Development (CCID) has developed a benchmarking and self-assessment framework for the measurement of college-wide internationalization efforts including rubric measures to assess each category of college internationalization efforts on a scale from “seeking, building, reaching, to innovating.”In the spring of 2015, the College began using the CCID framework to conduct a self-assessment and curriculum internationalization review of programs in the School of Business and Applied Arts (BAS). Lessons learned from the BAS pilot will be applied to other schools of the College as part of a continuous improvement plan for internationalization efforts.

• IIE Open Doors Reports: The Institute for International Education publishes annual data on international student enrollments and study abroad participation.Data disaggregated by associate’s degree colleges provides comparison data with other institutions and provides national trends and predictive analysis.The College is regularly within the top 20 sending institutions for study abroad and uses these numbers as comparative tools to assess program success.The College is not listed among top receiving institutions for international students (dominated by coastal and international border colleges), but uses trend data to set annual targets and assess areas for improvement.

• WTCS Benchmarking: The Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) Global Education Committee provides benchmarking data to compare international programs including both international students and study abroad.Most other WTCS colleges’ international programs are much smaller in scope and less firmly established that those at the College; hence CCID and IIE benchmarks provide a more appropriate peer comparison in most areas.

• Other Indicators: The College also benchmarks its performance by applying for various recognition awards. In 2011, the College received the CCID Werner Kubsch Award for Outstanding Achievement in International Education and in 2015 it received the IIE Andrew Heiskell award for Innovation in International Education.

Category 4:Valuing People

4P5 – How do you plan for changes in personnel?

At an institutional level, the College uses its budget process to identify priority positions to fund in the subsequent year. This process takes into consideration known and expected vacancies. The FY2015-16 budget development process was the first time this process was used in conjunction with shared governance. The provost and vice presidents, working with the deans and other managers, identified potential positions of need. The Cabinet, using a framework guided by the College’s mission and strategic directives, and taking into consideration the College’s fiscal constraints, identified from that pool of requested positions a select number of priorities to bring forward to the College community. [4] Through the new shared governance process (discussed in greater detail in the 2016 Highlights Report), those requested positions were considered and recommended to the president for inclusion in the FY2015-16 budget. A similar process is being used for FY2016-17.

Within the academic schools, deans plan course schedules one-year in advance based on trend analysis of enrollment and examination of student waitlists for courses and programs. From this planned schedule, course sections are assigned to full-time faculty. Where necessary, courses are assigned to part-time faculty. The deans conduct on-going interviews with prospective part-time faculty in order to maintain a pool of qualified candidates. The prospective pool of part-time candidates combined with currently active part-time faculty provides the deans with the means of allocating instructors to course sections that will not be taught by full-time faculty and fill in for course sections that were planned to be taught by a full-time faculty member who leaves immediately prior to the start of the semester.

As faculty positions become vacant, the provost and the deans review the needs of the entire academic portfolio based upon enrollment, future labor market demand for graduates, and other indicators of the health of the programs. This faculty position review process will benefit from the data and analyses generated through the formal program assessment process that begins in the fall of 2016-17 and related analyses provided by the Academic Strategy and Analysis team; both of these projects are discussed in the separate, accompanying 2016 Highlights Report.

All full-time employees, meeting certain qualifications, are eligible for early retirement; interested employees must file for early retirement in the fall. With that information, budget managers are aware of employees who will be leaving the institution by the start of the subsequent fiscal year (July 1). During the late fall and early spring, budget managers consider the known expected vacancies in planning and preparing budgets for the subsequent year.

4R2 – What are your performance results in valuing people?

The results of the 2014 Personal Assessment of the College Environment (PACE) employee survey administration compared to the results of 2011 (Table 3) show that the College made positive change in its scores in the four factor areas. [5] This builds on the progress from 2011 when all scores showed improvement over 2008. The College scored in the highest possible range in 2014 in the Student Focus area and scored in the second highest range in the remaining three categories.The College experienced positive change in each area and made significant positive change in the area of Institutional Structure and in its overall score. The overall score for the institution was in the Consultative range.

Table 3

_{*Represents a statistically significant difference from prior survey administration.}

Table 4 presents specific questions of the PACE survey related to the College’s environment regarding valuing people.

Table 4

^{*Represents a statistically significant difference from prior survey administration.}

The College reviews its participation in professional development opportunities for its faculty, staff, and administrators. Table 5 outlines the participation rates over the past five years.The convocation participation figures drastically decrease in 2014-15. The decrease is due to presenting convocation two times per as opposed to four times per year.

Table 5

The College examines trends in the areas of employee separation (excluding retirements), retirements, length of service, and filed grievances.

Separations, reported in Table 6, across the different employee groups have held relatively steady over the past five years across the employee groups.

Table 6

The 2014retirement rates listed in Table 7 were greater than prior years due to the fact that December 2014 was at the time the last known opportunity for employees to take early retirement from the College per the final collective bargaining agreement completed prior to enactment of statutory changes related to collective bargaining – 2011 Wisconsin Act 10. [6] Subsequent policy decisions by the College, informed by shared governance, led to retention of an early retirement program beyond 2014, but with different terms of eligibility for employees.

Table 7

The average tenure among the different employee types in Table 8 has not changed dramatically, except the full-time faculty that see the average years of service increase by more than one year between 2014 and 2015.

Table 8

Since 2011, annual grievances have been on a downward trend across all employee groups (Table 9).

Table 9

4R4 – How do your results for the performance of your processes for valuing people compare with the performance results of other higher education organizations, and, if appropriate, of organizations outside of higher education?

Compared to other institutions (Table 10), the College’s 2014 PACE employee survey scores in each of the four factor categories was less than the national norm by a significant difference.

Table 10

_{*Represents a statistically significant difference from Madison College.}

When examining questions specifically related to valuing people and comparing it to the national norm, the College performed significantly poorer than peers in 2014 even as the College made progress compared to its past performance on these same questions in the 2011 administration of the survey. The final two questions detailed in Table 11 are custom questions and not administered by other institutions.

Table 11

_{*Represents a statistically significant difference from Madison College.
N/A represents custom questions only administered by Madison College}

The College compares its rates of retirement, grievances, harassment, and per employee training expenditures to other institutions that participate in the National Community College Benchmark Project (NCCBP) on an annual basis. The most recent data for 2015 is presented in Table 12.

Table 12

Compensation – Staff and Administrators In 2014-15, the College, through a consultant, undertook a review of its salaries and wages for staff and administrators. The College identified as a goal to have base pay be at the 75^th percentile of the market. After compiling the market data, the consultant provided the following analysis in Table 13.

Table 13

According to guidelines provided by the consultant, the analysis shows that the College’s salaries for staff at the 75^th percentile are highly competitive (16.52% greater than the salary at the 75^th percentile) and that for administrators they are competitive (6.8% below the market at the 75^th percentile).The College made internal adjustments to individual administrators with compensation that was below the 75th percentile market salary and have “red-circled” staff that were above the 75^th percentile. The effect of red-circling an employee means that s/he will receive any annual compensation increases that are awarded, but they will not be added to the employee’s base pay, until such time as the 75^th percentile of the market aligns with the employee’s base wage. These policies reflect a decision to mitigate substantial discrepancies in wages and salary between current and future employees.

Compensation – Full-time and Part-time Faculty For both full-time and part-time faculty, the College uses salary data from the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR) and the Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) to understand its competitive position in the market. The data below is from the 2014 and 2015 surveys by CUPA-HR and WTCS.

Table 14

In 2015-16, the College is beginning the process of developing a market analysis to assist with the setting of salaries for future faculty members. This process is needed to respond, in part, to strict limitations on the College’s ability to raise revenue to support its operations via the property tax and the changes in statutes that limit collective bargaining to base wage increases not to exceed the annual rate of inflation.

Category 5:Leading and Communicating

5P8 – Process for improving the communication of the mission of the organization in a systematic fashion.

2013-14 Mission, Vision, Values and Strategic Planning Work The process to create new mission, vision, and values statements began in October 2013. That fall 1,074 faculty, staff, administrators, and students from all campuses participated in face-to-face and on-line sessions to develop themes for these statements. Input from the employee and student sessions were reviewed by the Strategic Planning Committee and the information was sorted into main themes.Those main themes led to the creation of draft mission, vision, and values statements, which were prioritized by more than 1,000 members of the college community through an on-line survey.

The top draft statement selections of all survey respondents were reviewed by the President’s Cabinet and the Strategic Planning Committee and presented to the District Board for their comments at the December 2013 Board Meeting. In January 2014, the District Board approved the new College mission, vision, and value statements.

Over 130 members of the College community participated in workshops at the January 2014 Convocation that focused on developing the strategic directives (goals) for the College and possible actions. The Strategic Planning Committee reviewed that input and refined it into six strategic directives with separate actions and considerations for each goal.

During the course of the 2013-14 academic year, and between the engagements of the entire College community regarding the mission statement and strategic directives, the Strategic Planning Committee members received and discussed presentations regarding the College’s finances, future demographics, projected labor market demands within the District, interests of policy-makers and the public regarding higher education, and trends in course delivery method. This information along with the ideas generated by colleagues across the College assisted the Strategic Planning Committee with finalizing its work. The progress of the Strategic Planning Committee was regularly communicated to the College community via Madison College Matters, the College’s thrice-weekly newsletter, and via process updates at convocation.

The research presentations provided to the Strategic Planning Committee and the resulting College strategic directives informed the work of the College’s academic plan (IMPACT Initiative) and student services’ plan Pillars of Promise) that were completed in spring 2014 by separate planning committees that engaged members of the College community in developing these respective plans. At the end of the 2014 spring semester, the president hosted presentations for members of the College community and public at each of the District’s nine campuses. The presentations reviewed the background data used to inform the College’s strategic plan and associated academic and student services’ plans, presented the goals of each of the plans, and reviewed the process used to create them.

Cabinet Communication Plan – 2014-15 and beyond - As part of improving communication to the College community about institutional priorities, updates on the progress of priorities, and providing College faculty, staff, and administrators with information necessary to participate in the work of shared governance, the president announced a new plan for communication in the spring of 2015.

The Cabinet agenda, which is shaped by the priorities of the shared governance process and the College’s mission and strategic directives, is presented at the annual August and January convocations. Quarterly, the Cabinet presents electronic updates on institutional priorities to the College community. Each fall and spring at mid-semester, members of the Cabinet travel to each of the College’s nine campuses and provide a priority issues update on items that the College is working on through shared governance and updates on other institutional priorities.

During the spring of 2015, the first electronic quarterly update and semi-annual Cabinet presentation were delivered. This process was repeated in fall of 2015 and is being planned for spring of 2016.

2015-16 academic year theme – Return to Our Foundations - Over the past 5 years, the College has experienced a number of significant changes driven by internal and external factors.

• November 2010 – District voters approve a $134 million referendum for new facilities; the largest such referendum in the history of Wisconsin. This approval represented years of planning and community engagement by members of the College community.

• February 2011 – The Wisconsin Legislature and Governor enact new legislation (2011 WI Act 10) significantly curtailing the rights and responsibilities of public sector labor unions. The College’s full-time and part-time faculty and staff are all represented by unions.

• January 2013 – Dr. Barhorst announces her retirement to take effective summer 2013.

• August 2013 – Dr. Daniels assumes the presidency of the College.

• March 2014 – Collective bargaining agreements with full-time faculty and staff enacted prior to 2011 Wisconsin Act 10’s effective date expire.

• 2013-14 Academic Year – Interest-based problem solving introduced to the College.

• Fall 2014 – Shared governance, utilizing interest-based problem solving, formally begins at the College. [7]

Some of these actions, such as a transition in the presidency, are normal for any institution, while other actions, such as the passage of a $100 million plus referendum or creation of a new system of shared governance are items that may not even occur once during the tenure of most college and university employees. The volume and pace of significant actions experienced by this College is unprecedented. The collective effect of these actions impacted the culture of the College community and has caused the College community to pursue new ways and structures to facilitate the work of the College in achieving its mission.

With an understanding of the actions that occurred in the past five years, the Cabinet identified the theme for the 2015-16 academic year as returning to our foundations, focusing on how we “live” our mission. The president presented this theme at the August Convocation. The process of how to actualize the living of the College’s mission is advancing through the introduction of new frameworks to guide how the College community will make decisions to live the mission in a manner consistent with the interest-based culture being established.

Frameworks to guide decision-making - The president convened a task force that met during the summer and early fall of 2015 to articulate and identify challenges that exist with regard to making decisions. The task force identified as challenges the need to explain “why” a decision is made and “how” a decision is made. From those discussions, members of the Cabinet engaged in the development of new frameworks to guide the College with answering the questions of “why” and “how” when making a decision.

The framework for “why” is shaped by the mission, vision, and values of the College and the associated strategic directives that were identified in 2013-14. The framework for “how” is grounded in the interest-based culture the College community is adopting and seeks to clarify the roles that different employee groups, shared governance entities, the Cabinet, President, and the District Board have in making decisions.

In November 2015, as part of the Cabinet’s priority issues update to the College community, these frameworks for “why” and “how” were previewed at sessions conducted at each of the College’s nine campuses. At the January 2016 Convocation, a session engaging the faculty, staff, and administrators in understanding and applying these frameworks to hypothetical decision-making situations related to how the College community might “live” the mission. In an effort to advance the use of these frameworks at the College the Office of Interest-based Problem Solving will develop courses for 2016-17 academic year that focus on the explanation, exploration, and use of these frameworks in an interest-based system of decision-making.

5R1 – Performance measures of leading and communicating

Madison College Matters Employee Newsletter – Historical Results - In 2012, the College undertook a college-wide survey research project regarding its employee newsletter, Madison College Matters, the primary tool for frequent communication to all faculty, staff, and administrators regarding internal events, college employees in the news, and other general announcements. At that time only 66% of 84 respondents found Madison College Matters to be a useful source of information. The research results led to a significant re-design of the newsletter, including the use of regular sections in the newsletter for which items would be published and a decrease in the number of articles appearing in each newsletter.

Another college-wide survey of all employees regarding Madison College Matters was conducted in spring of 2015. Ninety-seven percent of 323 respondents found it a useful source of information and 50% of 352 respondents indicated that it should continue to be published every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday; 31% thought it should be published one day per week; and 18% felt it should be published two times per week. Based on the data (survey responses and comments) Madison College Matters was retooled to include more embedded video and other media content. Additionally, articles no longer remain posted for extended periods of time; the expectation of readers is that content turn-over more frequently.

PACE Survey – Historical Results - The College participates in the national PACE employee survey administered by the National Initiative for Leadership and Institutional Effectiveness (NILIE). Statistically significant positive changes related to specific questions about leadership and communication occurred with items listed in Table 15.

Table 15

_{*Represents a statistically significant difference from prior survey administration.}

The College also administered ten custom questions, seven of which also appeared on the 2011 survey.All seven repeat questions showed improvement over 2011, including three that demonstrated statistically significant improvement. Two of the three new questions administered related to leading and communicating.Specifically, the question regarding whether employees had the opportunity to learn the basic principles of interest-based problem solving scored in the Collaborative range (4.01) and the question regarding whether employees had the opportunity to learn about shared governance principles just missed scoring in the Collaborative range (3.91).

NILIE also administered for the first-time as part of the PACE survey a sub-set of questions related to diversity. The College administered this section of the survey and, assuming NILIE offers it in the future, will administer it again. The survey consists of 27 questions and organizes them in the same four climate factor areas as the standard PACE questions. While the College has its results from 2014, historical and comparative data does not yet exist.

In summary, the PACE Diversity survey responses identified differences in the perceptions of institutional structure, supervisory relationships, teamwork, and student focus by employees of different racial/ethnic groups.In 66% of the questions, Whites had the highest range response rating; Latinos had the highest range response rate in 30% of the questions; and, Asians had the highest range response rate in the remaining questions. African-Americans had the lowest range response rating in 57% of the questions; individuals identifying as two or more races had the lowest range response rating in 15% of the questions; and, employees identifying as Other (which included Native Americans) had the lowest response rating in 28% of the questions.

The results of both the PACE Survey and the associated Diversity component have been presented to the College’s Leadership Council (comprised of all academic and administrative managers), human resources staff members, and the shared governance Diversity and Community Relations Council. These results have been shared with the new Vice President of Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement. [8] The vice president, working with the shared governance system, the Leadership Council and various academic, student services, and administrative units of the college will develop a plan of action to address issues identified in the survey.

5R3 – Comparative results of leading and communicating

Madison College Matters – Comparative Results - In a review of other Wisconsin Technical College System colleges’ use of employee newsletters, nine of 15 colleges responded and not one of them published a newsletter with the frequency of the College. Only one college published a newsletter weekly and six other respondents published monthly or every other month and two colleges did not publish any sort of newsletter.

In 2014, Madison College Matters received a Gold Award from the Higher Education Marketing Report for the College’s performance in the “New Media” and “Website and Automatic Newsletter Generator” categories.

PACE Survey – Comparative Results - Related to very direct and pertinent questions relevant to leading and communicating, the College was significantly below the national norm in five of the six questions listed in Table 15 of this report. The College’s mean response was identical to the national norm for one question regarding the use of problem-solving techniques by institutional teams. Each of the College’s mean responses to the questions in Table 15 was in the Collaborative range.

Category 6:Supporting Institutional Operations

In each of the next three sub-categories, information is provided for the following operations: Bookstore, Disability Resource Services, and Risk Management/Environmental Health and Safety.

6R1 – Measures and results of student service processes

Bookstore - The College’s Bookstore annually examines a number of metrics presented in Tables 16 and 17 related to its own past performance and compares its performance to peers.

Table 16

Table 17

The Bookstore, based on the data it examined and discussions with students, created a process whereby students could deduct the costs of their books directly from their expected student financial aid. This ensured that the students had their books purchased in advance of the first day of class. Previously, students without other financial resources needed to receive their financial aid check, deposit it with their financial institution, and then were able to purchase textbooks. This previous process sometimes left students without text books for the first week of classes, as students did not have the available funding to purchase books.

Per the request of the Student Senate, the Bookstore has made efforts to increase the number of text book titles that are available on a rental basis. As demonstrated in the data, progress has been made with 35 additional titles being made available in FY2014-15.

Disability Resource Services - The Disability Resource Services (DRS) unit annually examines a number of internal metrics related to its performance. These include: student satisfaction, academic success of DRS students compared to non-DRS students, and total number of students served and new student sserved.

Table 18

Table 19

Table 20

Analysis of the data in Tables 18, 19, and 20, combined with other information, shapes process improvement projects.For example, based upon DRS’s 2012-13 student survey, it engaged in focus groups in early 2014-15 and identified that students were not as satisfied with the quality of the note-taking services as they had been. As a result, DRS made changes to the note-taking process and are using more technology to assist with the provision of this service.

6R2 – Measures and results of administrative service processes, and

6R3 – Measures and results of organizational support service processes

Risk Management/Environmental Health and Safety - The Risk Management/Environmental Health & Safety unit measures its effectiveness by annually measuring the Worker’s Compensation (WC) modification rate, WC claims, and property thefts. [9] Through its collaborative work with other WTCS institutions, the College can compare its efforts to peer institutions in the area of WC modification rates.

Table 21

For the most recent five-year period shown in Table 21, the College had the best WC modification rate for WC insurance in four of the five years compared to the 15 other WTCS institutions. The College’s performance in this area improved due to a change in the focus of the program’s administration at the College. The College began to partner with injured employees to identify what activities such an employee could accomplish, rather than defaulting to the position that the employee could not perform any tasks until completely recovered from an injury. This change reduced the period of time employees were out of work, decreased WC insurance costs, and improved the relationship between the College and the employee.

As demonstrated in Table 22, in 2013-14, the College experienced an increase in thefts. The increase in thefts was due to new facilities that opened without clear identification of which faculty and staff were responsible for securing classrooms and labs. In FY14-15, a targeted communication effort was made to those units experiencing a high volume of thefts, roles were clarified, and property losses declined the following year.

Table 22

_{*Number of items / total value of items}

Category 7:Measuring Effectiveness

7R3 – Comparative results for performance of processes for measuringeffectiveness

In 2014-15, the College initiated the Center for Operational Excellence (COE), a unit of the Institutional Research and Effectiveness department charged with advancing the College’s efforts related to process improvement. [10] The creation of COE was informed, in part, by interviews with the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Administrative Process Redesign (APR) unit. The dialogue between the staff members of the College and UW-Madison provides an initial framework for understanding how to compare performance processes for measuring effectiveness with other institutions.

Category 9:Building Collaborative Relationships

9R3 – Comparison of performance results for building collaborativerelationships

External Collaborative Relations - As part of the implementation of performance-based funding in Wisconsin, the 16 college Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) created a data depository of information regarding each institution’s performance on the nine performance funding factors that are assessed. This collaborative effort led by the WTCS produces data for different comparative purposes. Available data includes a ranking of the placement of graduates in a job related to their field of study and placement of graduates in high-demand occupational fields. Based on the data in Table 23 for FY15-16, the College was awarded the second greatest amount of funding in the former category and greatest amount of funding in the latter category.

Table 23

When examining the College’s placement rate of individuals in related jobs, compared to the other WTCS colleges in Table 24, the College places 15 out of 16 colleges. This is due, in part, to the fact that the College offers a robust liberal arts transfer program compared to other WTCS colleges. Liberal arts graduates typically are not moving directly into employment, but rather continue their education at a four-year institution.

Table 24

WTCS colleges survey employers regarding their satisfaction with that institution’s graduates. The WTCS data depository summarizes the results of these surveys, shown in Table 25, into a manner that permits comparisons between the WTCS colleges. The College’s performance is minimally below the mean.

Table 25

Internal Collaborative Relations – As previously stated in this report, the College participates in the national PACE employee survey. The College last administered the survey in 2014.

The survey contains six questions that examine issues related to teamwork. The responses to the questions can be compared to the results of prior administrations of the survey by the College. Additionally, the College can compare its results to those of national participants that administer the survey at the same time.

In Table 26, the 2014 comparative results to the six questions related to teamwork showed that the College scored significantly below the national norm, while making progress on four questions compared to its past performance.The College scored in the Consultative range – the third highest of the four response ranges – in response to each of the questions in 2014.

Table 26 - PACE Survey Teamwork Questions

Core Criterion 2

In its response to Madison Area Technical College’s 2013 Systems Portfolio, the HLC reviewers noted that they did not identify evidence of the following components of Criterion #2: Integrity: 2.C. – Independence of the Governing Board; 2.D. – Academic Freedom; and 2.E. Responsible acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge by members of the college community. The College provides the following as evidence fulfilling the components of this criterion.

Independence of Governing Board – 2.C.

Chapter 38.10 of the Wisconsin Statutes specifies the appointment process of District Board members (the “governing board”). The trustee appointment committee for the College is comprised of the county board chairs of each of the 12 counties in the College’s District. The appointment committee’s chair is the county board chair from the most populous county in the College’s District. A quorum of the appointment committee is present when county board chairs representing 50% of the District’s population are present.

The District Board required membership is: 2 employers, 2 employees, 3 additional members, 1 school district administrator, and 1 local or state elected official. The entire membership of the District Board shall reflect the distribution of women and minorities (non-Whites) in the District. Annually, the appointment committee is required to publish its intent to appoint members, including criteria for selection and the process for soliciting names and qualifications of candidates. On a rotating basis, 3 seats are annually open for appointment. This information on District Board membership is available on the College’s website and in its annual budget in the section on governance.

As part of its members’ education and professional development, the College’s District Board is a member of the Wisconsin Technical College’s District Boards Association, Inc. and the Association of Community Colleges Trustees. These associations offer conferences and other services aimed specifically at the role and responsibilities of trustees, including support in understanding governance and developing policies to meet their community’s needs. Members of the College’s District Board are required via the Board’s policy to annually participate in at least one conference hosted by these organizations.

In 2013-14, the District Board engaged with Miriam Carver, a policy governance theorist and consultant. Through its work with Ms. Carver, the District Board re-affirmed its commitment to a policy governance framework in March 2014 when it approved revised Board End statements and other modifications to its policy governance framework. See the following for minutes and agendas:

If you are interested in viewing any of the below documents, please contact Kristin Rolling in the Madison College President's Office at (608) 246-6677.

March 12, 2014 Minutes;
March 12, 2014 Agenda;
June 11, 2014 Minutes;
June 11, 2014 Agenda;
July 14, 2014 Minutes; and
July 14, 2014 Agenda.

Academic Freedom – 2.D.

As part of its collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Local 243 AFT-Wisconsin, AFT, and AFL-CIO (the full-time faculty), the College had a statement of academic freedom contained within Section I. of the agreement. This CBA was in effect at the time when the College submitted its 2013 Systems Portfolio. The CBA with that provision expired in March 2014. After the March 2014 expiration of the CBA, under the law this type of statement was a prohibited subject of bargaining agreements (2011 Wisconsin Act 10).

In 2013-14, the contract alternative committee (CAC) identified and prioritized a number of issues that it wanted to address using the interest-based problem solving process, including academic freedom. [11] freedom was not formally addressed by the CAC in 2013-14 or by its successor shared governance entities in 2014-15, as those bodies addressed other issues collectively deemed as higher priorities. In the summer of 2015, the College’s Vice Provost worked with a sub-committee of the Academic Council to review the prior academic freedom statement from the CBA with the intention of affirming or modifying it.

In October of 2015, after having hosted listening sessions with faculty at the August Convocation, the Academic Council forwarded to the College Assembly a slightly modified version of the original academic freedom statement from the expired CBA. That draft statement was recommended for approval by the College Assembly and sent to the president. The president raised an issue with the draft and shared his interest with the shared governance bodies. The shared governance system is prepared to forward a revised statement on academic freedom, addressing the president’s interest, to the president early in the spring semester of 2016. The adopted statement will be included in the College’s employee handbook, posted at the website of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL), and presented at new faculty and part-time faculty orientations. Attached as appendix 1 is a draft copy of the revised statement, with the highlighted section representing the work completed, but not yet recommended to the College Assembly, to address the president’s interest in the statement.

Responsible acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge by members of the college community – 2.E.

The College has in place numerous policies, procedures, and services to assist students, faculty, and staff with appropriately engaging in the acquisition, discovery, and application of knowledge.

Students – The College has in place a Student Code of Conduct and associated Academic Integrity policy, which present expected behavior related to issues of honesty and dishonesty, including cheating, in the academic setting as well as the responsibility of students to follow copyright law. Related to the Academic Integrity policy are procedures for adjudicating any possible violations. The Academic Integrity webpage also links to resources that assist students with better understanding the issues of appropriate attribution of material from other sources.

Information regarding academic integrity is presented to students as part of new student orientation sessions, which are not mandatory. In 2014-15, 1,520 students were served by these sessions. This information is also covered in writing and research sessions presented by College library staff to many English and Written Communication classes. In 2014-15, approximately 9,000 students in 500 classes were presented with this orientation by library staff. At the beginning of the semester, individual faculty members may review these policies and associated services and guides that assist students with better understanding issues of appropriate discovery and application of knowledge. Finally, the College’s syllabus template refers to the Academic Integrity policy and within the template contains a link to the Academic Integrity policy.

Faculty, Staff, and Administrators – The College has in place services to assist faculty with identifying issues of academic misconduct by students; provides a regulatory framework for students, faculty, staff, and administrators seeking to use College data about students; and, provides training to faculty, staff, and administrators regarding what College student data represents.

The College has an academic integrity officer affiliated with its Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning.The officer conducts trainings at convocation sessions and school meetings and consults with faculty members one-on-one regarding services to refer students to for assistance with understanding academic misconduct and tools to help identify issues of academic misconduct. The academic integrity officer also explains to faculty the process for addressing misconduct, including its adjudication.

Tools available to assist students with understanding plagiarism and appropriate use include the following procured or created by the College’s library:

Ask a Librarian

About Copyright

Plagiarism Video

Copyright for Students

The College maintains an Institutional Review Board (IRB) registered with the federal Office for Human Resource Protections. The IRB is administratively attached to the Office of the Vice Provost. The College provides to the College community, including students, the IRB’s operating charter and procedures, FAQs regarding the process, and forms to complete for the IRB’s review of research requests.

The Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness supports faculty, staff, administrators, and students with requests for research and analysis. The office’s services include providing training and education on existing data and analyses provided by the College as well as working to develop new research and analysis projects and conducting surveys requested via a work request form.

The College requires training about the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) for faculty, staff, and administrators that request access to student records either in the College’s student information system or in another format and provides FAQ-style guides regarding FERPA.

Appendix 1 - Statement of Academic Freedom (Draft)

[1] The spirit and policy of this institution, developed and sponsored under progressive administrative and faculty member leadership, encourages the teaching, investigating and publishing of findings in an atmosphere of freedom and confidence.

[2] This spirit and philosophy is based on the belief that when students have the opportunity to learn and acquire knowledge from a variety of sources and opinions in an atmosphere of honest and open inquiry, they will develop greater knowledge and maturity of judgment.

[3] Therefore, the freedom of each educator to present within the classroom the truth as he/she understands it in relation to his/her area of professional competence is essential to the purposes of our College and society, and shall continue to be upheld by the Board and the administration.

[4] When the educator speaks or writes as a citizen, he/she shall be free from administrative and institutional censorship and discipline. However, the educator has the responsibility to clarify the fact that he/she speaks as an individual and not on behalf of the institution.

[5] Visiting Lecturers and Speakers.

1. Faculty may arrange for classroom lecturers or speakers to appear before regularly scheduled classes or groups of classes.

2. The faculty member shall be responsible for the relevance of the lecture or speaker’s subject matter to the course.

[6] Members of the College have freedom to address, question, or criticize, any matter, institutional policy, or practice, whether acting as individuals, or as members of an agency of institutional governance.

[7] As public employees, members of the College have a responsibility to refrain from using state resources, including paid classroom time, to engage in partisan advocacy.  This does not preclude the discussion of challenging or controversial subjects, nor the discussion of political parties or candidates in the context of the curriculum.  It does mean that a member of the college should not use his or her paid position with the college as a means of advancing the interests of a particular political party or candidate.

[8] As an institution, the College recognizes the value of exposing students to diverse perspectives, experiences, ideologies, and belief systems.  Members of the College are encouraged to value this diversity and integrate it, where appropriate, into their student interactions and instructional design

[9] The modification rate represents the amount of each $1 in approved WC claims that the College must pay, the balance of claims are paid by insurance.

[10] The 2016 Highlights Report contains a detailed discussion of the Center for Operational Excellence.

[11] The 2016 Highlights Report contains a detailed discussion of the contract alternative committee and the interestbased problem solving process.

**Note – Items 1-6 were presented to the College Assembly in October, 2015 and shared with the president.  Items 7 and 8 were drafted by a sub-committee of the Academic Council in spring 2016 to respond to the president’s interests to amend the October, 2015 statement.

Higher Learning Commission
2016 Comprehensive Quality Review

Madison Area Technical College Highlights Report

Overview

Since Madison Area Technical College (henceforth, the College) filed its 2013 Systems Portfolio, the College has embarked on two broad initiatives that advance principles of continuous quality improvement and, under the new AQIP Categorical construct, most directly align to Categories 3 – Valuing Employees; 4 – Planning and Leading; and 6 – Quality Overview. These initiatives are:

1. Interest-based problem solving and shared governance; and

2. the Academic Strategy and Analysis (ASA) and Center for Operational Excellence (COE) units.

Interest-Based Problem Solving and Shared Governance

History: The context for the interest-based problem solving (IBPS) and shared governance initiatives were shaped by factors external to the College. Prior to the enactment of Wisconsin 2011 Act 10 (Act 10) by the Wisconsin legislature and governor, state law permitted public employees to organize and bargain issues of base-wages, benefits, and working conditions. Since 1968, the College’s full-time faculty, part-time faculty, and staff were represented by labor organizations who bargained with the College District on these matters. The College District’s contracts negotiated with its full-time faculty and staff in spring of 2011 prior to enactment of Act 10 expired in March 2014. The College District’s final pre-Act 10 contract with its part-time faculty expired June 2012.

The contracts with the full-time faculty and staff that expired in March 2014, negotiated under the leadership of former College president Dr. Bettsey Barhorst, called for the creation of a contract alternative committee (CAC) to be comprised of members of the full-time faculty, staff, and administrators. The CAC would address issues related to employee benefits and working conditions.

In August of 2013, Dr. Jack E. Daniels, III, assumed the presidency of the College. In preparation for the March 2014 expiration of the full-time faculty and staff contracts, Dr. Daniels and the College’s executives sought to implement the CAC and include in its participation the part-time faculty. With the exception of annually negotiating base wage adjustments with represented faculty and staff up to the maximum level permitted by the State of Wisconsin, benefits and working conditions would be addressed by the CAC. However, whereas traditional collective bargaining functioned in an adversarial-style framework, Dr. Daniels sought to introduce the concept and use of IBPS to the CAC’s operations.

About IBPS: IBPS is based on concepts, research, and materials developed and advanced by scientists with the Harvard Negotiation Project and Cornell’s School of Industry and Labor Relations. IBPS (commonly referred to as interest-based bargaining) is different from collective bargaining as typically practiced since the 1950s by private and public sector unions and employers in the United States.

IBPS involves all parties identifying and agreeing to a problem or issue statement, articulating the interests that they have related to the issue, and then working to develop a solution that addresses as many of the identified interests as possible. Facilitators may be used in this process, but they function differently than in a traditional collective bargaining or mediation process where the facilitator may be an active participant in developing a resolution to the issue. In an IBPS process, the facilitator assists the parties with following the IBPS process, but does not get involved with the content of the subject under discussion and is not an active participant in developing a resolution to the matter.

IBPS at Madison College: After the Cabinet’s consultation with the leadership of the unions representing the full-time faculty, part-time faculty, and staff, it was agreed that IBPS would be a philosophy and process used by the CAC to conduct its activities. [1]

As articulated by the president at the October 2013 Convocation, IBPS was not just to be a practice of the CAC teams, it is to be a way for deans and faculty, administrators and staff, and all college employees to resolve issues at the College to fulfill the mission of the institution. The president recognized that the College was not only shifting into a new relationship with its faculty, staff, and administrators, but, due to other policy changes at the state and federal levels, was also facing new expectations for its performance and limitations on funding.

In order for the CAC to engage in IBPS, its members needed to learn the concepts of IBPS and have support of a facilitator in the practice of IBPS.  In the fall of 2013, the College contracted with Cornell University’s Schienman Institute for Conflict Resolution to provide training in IBPS to the participants of the CAC. Thirty-four faculty, staff, and administrators participated in the initial two and one-half days of training provided by Cornell, including all 18 members of the CAC teams. The contract with Cornell also included a facilitator to work with the CAC as it began to address issues of benefits and working conditions using an IBPS process.

During the all faculty assembly at the January 2014 Convocation, attendees heard from Mr. Eddie Genna, a faculty member at Maricopa Community College (Arizona), about his institution’s experience with IBPS. Mr. Genna also served as the facilitator to the CAC at Madison College and offered his observations on the College’s progress with IBPS. To increase the understanding of IBPS at the College, during the January 2014 Convocation and in 20 separate sessions offered at all the College’s campuses in early spring 2014,  the basics of IBPS were presented in a one-hour format.

Building off the initial 2014 IBPS College-wide training sessions, and to engrain IBPS in the College’s culture, an office dedicated to the on-going education and practice of IBPS was created. The office trained individuals to serve as IBPS facilitators and developed a series of training sessions for all College employees regarding the introduction to the IBPS process and the practice of specific parts of the IBPS process. These facilitators work with teams of faculty, staff and administrators using an IBPS process to resolve issues in the workplace such as the assignment of lab and classroom space for teaching.

 To date 69 people (28 faculty, 19 staff, and 22 administrators) have been trained as facilitators of IBPS and lead the practice of IBPS within their unit. The College also has six individuals trained as IBPS fellows. Fellows possess a higher level of skill and knowledge of the IBPS process than a facilitator would possess. The IBPS fellows provide facilitation services to units at any campus in the District that requests this service. Each shared governance council has an assigned IBPS-trained facilitator or fellow. Since the program’s inception, the fellows have facilitated 36 projects; these projects exclude facilitation of shared governance meetings. 

In the first year of offering introduction to IBPS training, the College provided thirty-two 1-hour sessions that were attended by 86 people (39 faculty, 40 staff, 2 administrators, and 5 students) and twenty-nine 3-hour sessions that were attended by 382 people (171 faculty, 90 staff, and 121 administrators). Additionally, members of the District Board of Trustees participated in a session regarding the concepts of IBPS so that they were familiar with the conceptual organizational transition the College is in the process of making.

Based on feedback from these initial IBPS training participants, beginning in spring 2016, the introduction to IBPS fundamentals was re-designed into a 90-minute session, replacing the high-level 1-hour session and the longer 3-hour session. At three sessions offered in January 2016, 24 people (11 faculty, 12 staff, and 1 administrator) participated in this new IBPS training format. In addition to the sessions on the basics of IBPS, the office has created sessions specific to certain concepts and practices in the IBPS process. Since the inception of the concepts and practices program offerings, 320 people (duplicated headcount) have participated in 27 of these sessions (126 faculty, 130 staff, 49 administrators, and 15 students).

To assess the College community’s understanding of IBPS, a question related to IBPS was included in the 2014 Personal Assessment of the College Environment (PACE) employee survey. The mean score of employee respondents to the statement “The extent to which I have had opportunities to learn the basic principles of interest-based problem solving” was 4.01. It scored in the collaborative range on the PACE evaluation scale—the most advanced level of organizational climate.[2]

Below are links materials that provide an overview of IBPS, a vision statement for it at the College, and examples of the College using IBPS to develop solutions to issues.

IBPS Overview November 2013

IBPS Project - School of Applied Science, Engineering, and Technology

IBPS Project - School of Academic Advancement

Shared Governance Background: The CAC teams were a product of the contracts with the full-time faculty and staff that expired in March 2014. With the introduction of IBPS in the fall of 2013 as a philosophy and practice at the College, it was acknowledged by the CAC and president that there needed to be a more permanent structure to how the College managed its internal affairs. To that end, the CAC created a team of faculty, staff, and administrators to research shared governance practices and structures at other community colleges and to make a recommendation for a structure at the College. The CAC members developed and shared a vision statement with the College community regarding the need for shared governance in an October 2013 document.

The CAC shared governance team created a Library Guide in the College’s on-line library that was accessible to the entire College community. This guide contained information regarding shared governance structures at other colleges and articles regarding the practice of shared governance.

Shared Governance Structure: At the August 2014 Convocation, the new shared governance structure developed by the CAC and its shared governance team was introduced and explained to the entire College community in a general session and immediately followed-up with specific sessions related to each of the seven shared governance councils. During the fall 2014 semester, the College’s shared governance bodies held initial elections, populated councils with additional appointed members, and began the work of collecting issues from the College community, completing work on issues identified by the CAC, and continuing the work of educating shared governance participants on the tenants of IBPS.

Figure 1 - Shared Governance Structure

During the summer of 2015, the College Assembly (the broadest shared governance body) created a Process Improvement Team sub-committee to recommend changes to the operations of shared governance based upon lessons that were learned in the first year of practice and the interests that were voiced by shared governance participants and members of the College community. The College Assembly approved those recommendations in the fall of 2015.

Engagement of Shared Governance with the College: To communicate the development and work of shared governance, the College created a specific newsletter for shared governance activities that is connected to the College employee e-newsletter Madison College Matters. Published twice-monthly the shared governance newsletter contains synopses of the work of each of the seven councils and the College Assembly. To assess the College community’s understanding of shared governance a question related to shared governance was included in the 2014 PACE employee survey. The mean score of employee respondents to the statement “The extent to which I have had opportunities to learn about shared governance” was 3.91. It scored in the Consultative range on the PACE scale, just missing the Collaborative range, which is the most advanced range of organizational climate.

The shared governance support staff maintain a shared governance website accessible to the members of the College community. The site contains the agendas and minutes of the councils and College Assembly, permits individuals to submit issues and interests for consideration by shared governance bodies, provides an inventory of shared governance recommendations approved by the president, and lists email addresses to contact each council.

At the January 2016 Convocation, shared governance participants discussed the work of the councils and the College Assembly with the College community. Shared governance participants encouraged College community members to volunteer to serve on the shared governance bodies; elections and appointments for two-year terms beginning in the fall of 2016 will occur later in the spring of 2016. Members of the College Assembly will meet with faculty, staff, and administrators of each unit of the College during the spring of 2016 to inform employees of the role of shared governance at the College; how to get involved with shared governance; and, how to share interests and issues with councils and the College Assembly. The Office of Student Life staff informs the Student Senate members of these same processes.

Academic Strategy Analysis and Center for Operational Excellence

AcademicStrategy and Analysis (ASA): Founded in summer 2015, ASA's purpose is to add capacity to gathering, translating and implementing industry and program trend data as the College strives for the most responsive, relevant academic portfolio as possible. ASA is a unit of the Office of the Vice Provost and was created by re-purposing resources and talent from a former unit of the College known as School of Accelerated and Online Learning (SOAL). ASA seeks to improve the College’s ability to respond to the evolving needs of students, employers, and policy-makers with regard to the academic programs and training provided by the College. ASA tracks trends in academic innovation in areas such as on-line and accelerated learning, competency-based learning, embedded credentials, and development of career pathways. ASA reports on trends in the labor market, is developing a series of monthly reports on issues identified by faculty and deans, and will manage the program assessment tool that is under development. Analyses developed by ASA are shared with units outside of academic affairs that use the information to serve academic programs and respond to student needs.

With its knowledge of relevant state and federal regulations, ASA provides direct support for the creation of new academic credentials and programs. As of fall 2015, the ASA is working on projects with 18 academic programs and completed work on 14 other projects that were approved by the Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) Board.

Program Assessment Tool and Process: The program assessment tool under development is a data-based process of assessing individual programs at the College. ASA staff will facilitate the tool on a day-to-day basis and support the work of program directors and deans related to translating the data into actions aimed at the improvement and strengthening of programs. The underlying automated IT programming for the assessment tool is expected to be complete by April 2016. Currently, the project is in a pilot phase involving 2-3 programs from each school; data was manually pulled from College IT data systems for the pilot. The complete roll-out for the assessment program, including training for faculty and staff on its use, is expected to begin in fall 2016-17.

The assessment process consists of three phases. Phase I involves an examination of data related to past performance and future market need for program graduates. Based upon that review, programs will be placed into one of four quadrants in the portfolio framework shown below.

Figure 2 - Program Assessment Portfolio Framework

Depending on the outcome of Phase I analysis, some programs will be moved into Phase II of the process which will involve a review of additional data related to student demographics, success, instructional delivery method, time of course offerings and other elements as well as a SWOT analysis performed by program directors and faculty with insights from deans. The results of each subsequent phase will inform future options for that program which may include consolidation, growth, or a path to elimination.

Center for Operational Excellence (COE): Founded in fall 2014, COE is a new unit within the purview of the Office of the Vice President for Institutional Learning and Effectiveness to improve the College’s culture of process improvement through consultation with College units on specific projects and through the creation of an ecosystem to support process improvement work across the College. The College allocated one FTE position exclusively to this function and allocated portions of the director of Institutional Research and Effectiveness (IRE) and an IRE project consultant’s time to this effort.

Consulting Projects: In its initial year of operation (2014-15), COE focused exclusively on working with College units on specific process improvement projects. The College’s Cabinet identified the projects; a Cabinet member(s) served as executive sponsor(s) for each project. COE began with nine initial projects and completed seven of them.

The goal of the consulting projects is to optimize the performance of College processes in a sustainable manner. Projects begin with a thorough assessment of the current state and mapping of the current process. Key metrics are established to review performance and compare performance to industry standards or peer groups. Projects should create efficiencies for the unit(s) involved and improve outcomes for students or College faculty, staff, and administrators. Participants in the projects should develop an understanding of how to engage systematically in process improvement work, permitting them to engage in future projects without the support of COE consultants.

Process Improvement Community: In an effort to support College-wide efforts with process improvement work, COE launched the process improvement community initiative in the fall of 2015. The College president presented this initiative to the College at the August 2015 Convocation. The solicitation for participation in the process improvement community was made to all members of the College community.

At the initial session of the process improvement community, 32 participants from 20 different units identified two distinct needs. First, individuals with previous process improvement experience wanted to create an opportunity for “learning through sharing”. These participants wanted to share their experiences, learn from others engaged in similar process improvement work, and be kept apprised of the other work of COE. Participation in this will be open to all members of the College community and members will actively guide development of the agenda for its meetings. This community will have its initial meeting in February 2016.

Second, individuals with limited experience in process improvement wanted to learn the basic techniques involved in process improvement work and apply it to projects in their units. This group will function as a cohort and meet one-time per month, two hours per session for six months. These participants will have assignments outside of their meetings in order to advance their process improvement knowledge and the project the member has identified. The initial cohort began meeting in December 2015.

To assess the impact of COE’s work, COE will develop instruments to survey the satisfaction and learning of project clients and assess the satisfaction of ecosystem participants with their learning and projects. At an institutional level, the PACE employee survey includes questions related to use of problem solving techniques, cooperation among team members, the extent to which supervisors consider employees ideas. These and other PACE questions assist the College with understanding the evolution of the College’s process improvement culture.

[1] The Cabinet is comprised of the College’s senior executives and meets regularly with the president.

[2] PACE survey respondents rate statements on a 5-point scale, with 1 being the lowest score and five the highest score. The mean result for each statement is placed into one of four ranges: Collaborative (4.0-5.0), Consultative (3.0 to 3.99), Competitive (2.0-2.99), and Coercive (1.0-1.99). These ranges describe the climate of the institution related to each of the statements. The PACE survey is administered approximately every two years.

Higher Learning Commission
2016 Comprehensive Quality Review

Madison Area Technical College Multi-Campus Evaluation Report

Introduction

As part of the 2016 Multi-Campus Evaluation Report of branch campuses for Madison Area Technical College (henceforth, the College), the reader will, on occasion, be directed to information included in the 2013 Systems Portfolio, the 2016 Systems Portfolio Addendum, and the 2016 Highlights Report.The latter two reports are filed concurrently with this report for the Comprehensive Quality Review site visit of March 2016.

Overview

The campuses included in this report are the Portage and Reedsburg campuses of the College District’s Northern Region; the Fort Atkinson and Watertown campuses of the College District’s Eastern Region; and the Commercial Avenue campus of the College District’s Metro Region. The Commercial Avenue campus is not considered a “branch campus” by the Higher Learning Commission.

The HLC Comprehensive Quality Review team previously identified visits to the Portage, Reedsburg, and Commercial Avenue campuses as part of the College’s Comprehensive Quality Review. As a result of that determination, this report contains select and applicable information about the Commercial Avenue campus, but not the other District Metro campuses.

Operational Governance

The operational governance and associated reporting structure of the College’s Northern and Eastern Region campuses is centralized with the College’s executives at the Truax campus in Madison. The Commercial Avenue campus does not have a separate administrative structure; it is an education facility in the Metro Region that hosts specific program and course offerings.

Regional Deans:The deans of the Northern and Eastern Regions are direct reports to the provost and serve on the Deans’ Council with the deans of the College’s six schools and the vice provost. The deans of the six schools, and associated faculty, are responsible for program and curriculum design and development, course scheduling, and identification of learning objectives and associated assessments. Only a limited number of academic degree programs can be completed solely at a regional campus and those program offerings vary among the regional campuses. [1]

The dean of each region is responsible for hiring an associate dean, campus manager, and other clerical staff. The dean, via the associate dean, may also hire part-time faculty for courses. The regional deans have primary responsibility for conducting outreach with business and industry, K-12 school districts, civic organizations, and other community leaders in their region. The regional deans attend the District Board’s monthly meetings and provide oral reports to board members on the activities and initiatives occurring in the regions.

Regional Services: The administrators and clerical staff in the regional dean’s office report to the regional dean, the regional associate dean, or the campus managers. The student services staff members that work at the regional campuses report to managers in Madison that report to the vice president of student development and success. Beginning this spring, custodial and select maintenance staff members will be hired by and report to the regional deans, rather than reporting to managers in Madison that report to the vice president of administrative services. More complex maintenance projects at the regional campuses involving plumbing or electricity will be handled by either facility services staff from Madison or local contractors hired by the regional deans. This change in staff reporting was based on conversations between the regional deans and vice president of administrative services regarding the regional campuses’ facility needs.

Planning and Budgeting

The planning and budgeting processes for the regional campuses are identical to those of other units of the College. The College’s annual budget document for FY2015-16 contains a description of the College’s budget development process and process for mid-year budget adjustments, if necessary. Section 2P6 of the 2013 Systems Portfolio articulates the unit planning process. [2] With the introduction of a system of shared governance the budget process is evolving [3]. Section 4P5 of the 2016 Systems Portfolio Addendum explains how the FY2015-16 budget process, the first involving shared governance, unfolded as it relates to changes in personnel. In spring 2016, unit planning will occur for FY2017-18. Accompanying the change in the time of year for unit planning, previously done in the fall of the year, will be an effort to examine what elements will be required in unit planning for FY2018-19 and beyond.

As budget managers, the regional campus deans have a budget for the personnel and related supplies and services for their offices. The staff members located at the regional campuses that do not report to the regional deans engage in unit planning with their units in student development and success and administrative services. Those employees not reporting to the regional deans have accompanying budgets for their activities within their employment units.

The regional campuses do not separately retain revenues from the tuition of students attending a regional campus or other revenues e.g., a room rental fee paid for space at a regional campus. Those revenues, like all revenues, are deposited into the College District’s General Fund or other appropriate District Fund as required by the Wisconsin Technical College System.

Educational Quality and Improvement

The responsibility for the process for improving educational quality resides with the Office of the Provost and the deans of the academic schools; it does not directly rest with the regional deans other than their hiring and support of regional part-time faculty. The school deans and the respective full-time faculty are responsible for ensuring that all programs and courses have the same rigor and outcomes across the College District. Sections 1P9 through 1P15 of the 2013 Systems Portfolio articulate many of the processes related to improving the quality of teaching; detecting and addressing the differences in student learning styles; defining, documenting and communicating expectations for effective teaching and learning; building a course delivery system that meets the needs of students; and, ensuring up-to-date and effective programs and courses.

The 2016 Systems Portfolio Addendum explains the work that has been undertaken related to identifying and assessing College-wide student learning objectives (the “Core Workforce Skills”) and identifying and assessing program specific learning objectives. The 2013 Systems Portfolio identified these as areas of improvement.

The 2016 Highlights Report presents an overview of the new Academic Strategy and Analysis (ASA) unit and the academic program review process. The work of the ASA unit, program review process, and plan-do-check-act methodology of identifying and assessing student learning outcomes are key efforts in improving the quality of the entire institution.

Non-Instructional Services

The College has processes in place for students and faculty, staff, and administrators at regional campuses to access non-instructional services.

Student Services: In many instances, a staff person is assigned to provide services to both campuses in the region (Northern Region or Eastern Region). The exceptions are academic advising where each campus has one full-time advisor and financial aid services in Reedsburg, where one full-time financial aid specialist serves students. The College provides the following student services at its regional campuses.

Enrollment Services
All enrollment functions (recruitment, admissions, enrollment, and records) are available at each campus via campus office staff. Financial aid and veteran education benefit issues are addressed by campus office staff. Those students presenting a more complex set of issues have those matters forwarded to financial aid staff in Madison via telecommunications.

Student Academic Support Services
Each regional campus has staff available to administer testing services. Additionally, there are staff available to assist students at each campus with using library resources and to provide tutoring services.

Student Development Services
Each regional campus has staff available to provide academic advising, counseling services, career placement services, and disability resource services.

Student Life – Activities/Events and Volunteer Experiences
Engagement teams exist at each campus. Staffing for activities and events is accomplished with student staff with supervision from the Office of Student Life in Madison and with a staff or faculty engagement team advisor at each campus. A Phi Theta Kappa (Honor Society) with its own campus student leader exists at each campus. Each campus also has a student representative serve on the College’s Student Senate.

Administrative Services:

Facilities
The facility needs of the regional campuses are part of the College’s overall facility planning efforts. The College’s existing long-term Master Facility Plan from 2009 identified building expansion needs at each of the four regional campuses. Those facility needs were addressed with the proceeds from the November 2010 taxpayer approved $134 million referendum. The regular, on-going facility needs of the regional facilities are included in the College’s annual maintenance plan and in the short-term three-year facility plan that is annually updated and submitted to the Wisconsin Technical College System.

Information Technology
The College plans for the technical infrastructure and IT security needs of all campuses through the Technology Services (TS) unit in Madison. Specific lab, classroom, and service area remodel and renovation projects identified and advanced through the Facility Services unit and associated processes involve TS staff and relevant regional campus staff. The hardware (e.g., desktops, laptops, and monitors) and enterprise software needs (e.g., Microsoft Office) of the regional campuses are addressed in accordance with the College’s technology “refresh” policy. Regional campus students and employees may access assistance of the TS Help Desk via telephone or email for routine issues. On a rotational basis, TS field technicians travel weekly to each regional campus to assist with service and support coordination and issue resolution. When necessary, TS staff will travel to the regional campuses outside the normal, rotational schedule to address issues on-site. All campuses of the College have the same access to the primary data center in Madison via a high-speed network. Access to College services is also available to all employees from home or other places using various means, such as the virtual private network, through the Internet.

Public Safety
For emergency issues, the local police department or county sheriff is the initial responder to any incident that may arise. The regional management team works with the College’s Public Safety staff to ensure local law enforcement are familiar with the facilities and that there is a coordinated response and agreed upon procedures for each campus facility in case of an emergency. Public Safety also provides education and training to regional campus administrators, faculty, and staff on preparedness issues e.g., what to do in case of an active shooter incident.

Human Resources
The deans, associate deans, and campus managers are supported in the hiring process by human resources business partners located in Madison. Human resources staff, on occasion, travel to the campuses to explain policy changes to managers and employees, provide updates about benefits, and to assess other needs that campus administrators may have related to their responsibilities. Other issues that employees of the regional campuses may have that involve the knowledge of or processes related to human resources staff may be resolved via phone calls or other scheduled meetings.

Attachments

Overviews of the following campuses:

• Reedsburg

• Portage

• Watertown

• Fort Atkinson

• Commercial Avenue

Madison Area Technical College Branch Campus Data

Northern Region - Reedsburg

Date of inception:

First vocational classes began in 1977

Programs offered:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Enrollments for each program:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Projected enrollments for the next three years:

Year

Lower

Upper

Mean

2016

202.78

208.95

205.86

2017

204.52

210.70

207.61

2018

205.07

211.24

208.15

Number of full-time/part-time faculty assigned to Campus:

Full-time Faculty = 10; Part-time Faculty = 69

Number of administrators on-site:

Three*

Student services available at Campus:

4.75 FTE

Additional locations linked to the campus:

Sauk Prairie Village Dental (Madison)
Greenway Manor/Spring Green (Madison)
Plain Tech Train Enterprise Center (Madison)
Baraboo Senior High School (Madison)
Webb Middle School Reedsburg (Madison)
Praire Du Sac Fire/EMS (Madison)
Sauk Praire Village Dental (Madison)
Sauk City Workforce Dev Center (Madison)
Greenway Man/Spring Green (Madison)
Headstart - Reedsburg (Madison)
Plain TTEC (Madison)
Baraboo Senior Hs/Baraboo (Madison)
Sauk Jail/Baraboo (Madison)

_{* Both Dean and Associate Dean serve regionally. Each site has its own campus manager.}

Madison Area Technical College Branch Campus Data

Northern Region - Portage

Date of inception:

First vocational classes began in 1977

Programs offered:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Enrollments for each program:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Projected enrollments for the next three years:

Year

Lower

Upper

Mean

2016

215.85

222.42

219.13

2017

217.70

224.28

220.99

2018

218.28

224.86

221.57

Number of full-time/part-time faculty assigned to Campus:

Full-time Faculty = 3; Part-time Faculty = 53

Number of administrators on-site:

Three*

Student services available at Campus:

4.25 FTE

Additional locations linked to the campus:

Columbia County Jail (Madison)
Columbia County Correctional Inst (CCI) (Madison)
Portage High School (Madison)
Port CCI-C/MATC Portage (Madison)
Columbus Senior Center (Madison)
Woodridge Elementary-Portage (Madison)
Portage Enterprise Center (Madison)
Portage High School/MATC-Portage (Madison)
Randolph
High School/Randolph (Madison)
Montello High School /Montello (Madison)
Julia Rusch Cafeteria (Madison)
Marquette County Workforce Dev Ct (Madison)
Columbia County Jail/MATC-Portage (Madison)
Port CCI-B/MATC-Portage (Madison)
Port CCI-P/MATC-Portage (Madison)
Woodridge Elementary-Portage (Madison)

_{* Both Dean and Associate Dean serve regionally. Each site has its own campus manager.}

Madison Area Technical College Branch Campus Data

Northern Region - Watertown

Date of inception:

First vocational classes began in 1977

Programs offered:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Enrollments for each program:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Projected enrollments for the next three years:

Year

Lower

Upper

Mean

2016

227.92

234.86

231.39

2017

229.88

236.82

233.35

2018

230.49

237.44

233.96

Number of full-time/part-time faculty assigned to Campus:

Full-time Faculty = 12; Part-time Faculty = 53

Number of administrators on-site:

Three*

Student services available at Campus:

4.25 FTE

Additional locations linked to the campus:

Watertown High School (Madison)
Riverside Middle School Watertown (Madison)
Watertown Senior Center (Madison)
Karl Fischer Center (Madison)
Watertown High School/MATC-Watertown (Madison)
Watertown Mid School/MATC-Watertown (Madison)
Watertown Sr. Center/MATC-Watertown (Madison)
Marquardt Village Watertown (Madison)
Waterloo (Madison)

_{* Both Dean and Associate Dean serve regionally. Each site has its own campus manager.}

Madison Area Technical College Branch Campus Data

Northern Region - Fort Atkinson

Date of inception:

First vocational classes began in 1931

Programs offered:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Enrollments for each program:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Projected enrollments for the next three years:

Year

Lower

Upper

Mean

2016

307.70

317.07

312.39

2017

310.35

319.72

315.03

2018

311.18

320.55

315.86

Number of full-time/part-time faculty assigned to Campus:

Full-time Faculty = 9; Part-time Faculty = 73

Number of administrators on-site:

Three*

Student services available at Campus:

4.25 FTE

Additional locations linked to the campus:

Fort Atkinson High School (Madison)
Fort Atkinson Senior Center (Madison)
Fort Atkinson High School/MATC-F.Atkinson (Madison)
Fort Atkinson Senior Center/MATC-F.Atkinson (Madison)
Jefferson Fire Station (Madison)
Jefferson Senior Center (Madison)
Whitewater Armory (Madison)

_{* Both Dean and Associate Dean serve regionally. Each site has its own campus manager.}

Madison Area Technical College Branch Campus Data

Northern Region - Commercial Avenue

Date of inception:

First vocational classes began in 1968

Programs offered:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Enrollments for each program:

See attached Primary Program by Campus

Projected enrollments for the next three years:

Year

Lower

Upper

Mean

2016

158.31

163.13

160.72

2017

159.67

164.49

162.08

2018

160.10

164.92

162.51

Additional locations linked to the campus:

NWRCC/Madison Training Center (Madison)
Madison Labor Temple (Madison)

[1] Degree programs refer to one-year technical diplomas, two-year technical, and two-year associate degrees. Select certifications e.g., certified nursing assistant, also may be earned by solely attending a regional campus.

[2] As described in Section 2P6, the unit planning process was presented in relation to non-instructional units; the same unit planning process applies to instructional units.

[3] The 2016 Highlights Report contains a detailed discussion of shared governance.