Friday, September 7, 2012
HIGHER EDUCATION ACCREDITATION
SCHEDULE FOR RECOGNITION REVIEW OF
CALL FOR THIRD-PARTY COMMENT
These organizations will be reviewed at the November 19-20, 2012 meeting of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) Committee on Recognition. Third-party comment must be received in the CHEA office no later than October 15, 2012 and may be submitted by mail, fax or email to:
Council for Higher Education Accreditation
One Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 510, Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-955-6126 - Fax: 202-955-6129 - Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Joint Review Committee on Education Programs in Nuclear Medicine Technology
Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs
American Psychological Association Commission on Accreditation
Aviation Accreditation Board International
The Committee on Recognition meeting will take place at One Dupont Circle, Level 1B in Conference Room A.
CHEA recognition review includes an opportunity for parties independent of the accrediting organization under review to comment on whether the organization meets the CHEA recognition standards. Third-party comment may be either oral or written and is limited to the accrediting organization's efforts to meet the CHEA recognition standards. This may include commentary from many different sources, such as other accrediting organizations, institutions and programs, or professional or higher education associations. The comments will assist the CHEA Committee on Recognition as it considers the applications for recognition. A list of the committee on recognition members is provided here.
CHEA staff will review any third-party comment to assess its applicability to the recognition review. As provided in the 2006 and 2010 CHEA Recognition Policy and Procedures , third-party comments are reviewed by the CHEA Committee on Recognition.
"THIRD-PARTY COMMENT. Third-party comment may be either oral or written and is limited to the accrediting organization's efforts to meet the CHEA recognition standards. All third parties requesting the opportunity to make comment related to an accrediting organization's recognition review are to notify CHEA staff and provide the names and affiliations of the persons requesting the opportunity to make third-party comment and a description of the organization(s) they represent. CHEA staff will review third-party requests for oral or written comment for completeness and applicability to eligibility and recognition standards.
Third parties who wish to appear for oral comment before the CHEA Committee on Recognition are to provide an outline of the proposed oral comment. Where in the judgment of the Committee doing so may be useful, the Committee may invite third parties to appear before the Committee. The accrediting organization will receive the outline of the proposed oral comment of third parties invited to appear. Accrediting organizations will have the opportunity to review and respond to proposed oral comment.
Third parties wishing to make written comment are to provide the text of the third-party comment. After review by CHEA staff, written comment will be provided to the Committee and the accrediting organization. Accrediting organizations will have the opportunity to review and respond to written comment.
Third parties are to provide an outline of their oral comment or the text of their written comment in sufficient time to provide for review by CHEA staff, review and response by the accrediting organization, and for the outline or text to be provided to the Committee.
CHEA staff will notify all concerned parties of the location, date, and time of the public presentation."
Posted: August 29, 2012 Updated: September 7, 2012
Bulk-Purchasing E-Textbook Experiment Expands to More Colleges
September 5, 2012, 2:55 pm
An experimental business model for delivering e-textbooks is expanding, with some adjustments, to 26 colleges and universities this fall. The institutions will participate in a pilot project in which they will buy digital course materials in bulk from publishers to reduce costs for students, and the project’s leaders say they are dealing with obstacles faced in an earlier test of the approach.
The project is a partnership of the colleges, the Internet2 high-speed networking group, Educause, the e-book broker Courseload, and McGraw-Hill’s education-publishing division. Last spring five research universities paid $20,000 each to provide up to 1,000 students with e-books and the Courseload platform. This semester a new pricing model that charges around $35,000 for universities with more students using e-books will be added, said Greg Jackson, vice president of Educause.
The project drew mixed reviews last spring, according to a final report based on surveys of participating professors and students. While the students appreciated the e-books’ affordability, many found the technology difficult to navigate and didn’t use its collaborative features.
Mr. Jackson said the new pilot project would expand beyond research universities to a variety of other institution types, including community colleges and liberal-arts colleges.
The program has taken students’ feedback into consideration by making the Courseload e-book platform “smoother and more sophisticated,” Mr. Jackson said. Most student complaints last spring involved difficulties with searching the e-books and using them easily across a variety of devices—for example, moving from reading on a computer to reading on a mobile phone.
Of the five universities that participated in the spring pilot, three—Cornell University, the University of Virginia, and the University of Wisconsin at Madison—will continue with the fall project.
The pilot project will monitor e-books’ integration into campus technology and focus on whether e-textbooks improve student learning, according to Shel Waggener, senior vice president of Internet2.
“Is there an association between the ease of digital content and the speed by which faculty can move through material?” he said. “Does enhanced collaboration have any pedagogical impact—do students score better?”
Negotiations are under way for another pilot program in the spring of 2013 that officials hope will embrace 50 to 75 universities.
“Those of use who’ve been involved in this hope and believe that this model—which is essentially a licensing model based on institutional size—will replace individual students’ buying individual texts,” Mr. Jackson said. “That model is too cumbersome and is adding costs unnecessarily.”
Following is the list of colleges and universities participating this fall:
Baylor University (Tex.)
California State Polytechnic University at Pomona
Castleton State College (Vt.)
Colorado State University at Fort Collins
Community College of Vermont
Cornell University (N.Y.)
Dartmouth College (N.H.)
Iowa State University of Science and Technology
Madison Area Technical College (Wis.)
Miami University (Ohio)
Michigan State University
Middlebury College (Vt.)
Northern Kentucky University
Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville
State University of New York at Buffalo
State University of New York at Stony Brook
University of Alaska at Anchorage
University of California at Berkeley
University of Hawaii-Manoa
University of Iowa
University of Kentucky
University of South Florida
University of Virginia
University of Wisconsin at Madison
Wichita State University (Kan.)
[Creative Commons licensed Flickr photo by Nomadic Lass]
Correction (9/5/2012, 5:44 p.m.): Because of incomplete information from the pilot project’s organizers, this article originally included imprecise names on the list of participating institutions. Among the participants are Castleton State College and the Community College of Vermont, not the Vermont State Colleges system. Also, only the University of Alaska’s Anchorage campus and the University of Hawaii’s Manoa campus are participants, not their respective systems. The list has been updated to reflect this correction.