Asia Strategy

1
AACSB International 2009 Standards Update
APLG/FSA Annual Seminar February 2009
Jerry Trapnell, EVP Chief Accreditation
Officer AACSB International
2
AACSB International2009 Standards Update

• Standards revisions for April 2009 vote
• Interpretive changes approved by AQC
• De Minima and other corrections
• Transition framework
• Other developments
• Questions and discussion

3
Standards Revisions for April 2009 Vote
4
Eligibility Criterion A

• A collegiate institution seeking AACSB
  accreditation must be a member of AACSB
  International.

5
Standard 1

• The school publishes a mission statement or its
  equivalent that provides directions for making
  decisions. The mission statement derives from a
  process that includes the viewpoints of various
  stakeholders. The mission statement is
  appropriate to higher education for management
  and consonant with the mission of any institution
  of which the school is a part. The school
  periodically reviews and revises the mission
  statement as appropriate. The review process
  involves appropriate stakeholders. MISSION
  STATEMENT

6
Standard 2

• The mission incorporates a focus on the
  production of quality intellectual contributions
  that advance knowledge of business and management
  theory, practice, and/or learning/pedagogy. The
  schools portfolio of intellectual contributions
  is consistent with the mission and programs
  offered. INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS

7
Standard 10
Standard 10 The faculty of the school has, and
maintains expertise to accomplish the mission and
to ensure this occurs, the school has clearly
defined processes to evaluate individual faculty
members contributions to the schools mission.
The school specifies for both academically
qualified and professionally qualified faculty,
the required initial qualifications of faculty
(original academic preparation and/or
professional experience) as well as requirements
for maintaining faculty competence (intellectual
contributions, professional development, or
practice). FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS
8
Standard 15

• Added to the list of general knowledge and skill
  areas
•  
• Communication abilities
• Ethical understanding and reasoning abilities
• Analytic skills
• Use of information technology
• Dynamics of the global economy
• Multicultural and diversity understanding
• Reflective thinking skills
•  

9
Standard 18

• Added to the Capacities statements for MBA
  programs
• Capacity to lead in organizational situations.
• Capacity to apply knowledge in new and unfamiliar
  circumstances through conceptual understanding of
  relevant disciplines.
• Capacity to adapt and innovate to solve problems
  to cope with unforeseen events, and to manage in
  unpredictable environments.
• Capacity to understand management issues from a
  global perspective.
•  

10
Standard 19

• Added to the Capacities for specialized masters
  programs
• Application of knowledge even in new and
  unfamiliar circumstances
• Ability to adapt and innovate to solve problems.
• Capacity to critically analyze and question
  knowledge claims in the specified discipline.
• Capacity to understand the specified discipline
  from a global perspective.

11

• Interpretive Materials

12
Preamble

• Sections added on
• Elaboration on AACSBs interpretation of
  collegiate and its implications for attributes
  of schools seeking and having AACSB accreditation
• Reinforcing importance of mission-based
  accreditation, peer review, and professional
  judgment in evaluating overall high quality and
  continuous improvement
• Clarification of standards as guidelines to be
  applied on a global basis

13
Eligibility Criteria A, B, and C

• Criterion A (new) Defines when membership must
  be established to seek accreditation
• Criterion B (formerly A) Further clarifies
  documentation regarding authority to grant
  degrees and types of degrees
• Criterion C (formerly B) Links focus on
  collegiate schools of business to accreditation
  expectations regarding evidence of continuing
  resources

14
Eligibility Criterion D (formerly C)

• Criterion D
• Establishes process for determining the
  institution seeking accreditation and allows
  schools to seek institutional status in a form
  different from formal organization chart
• Based on relationship with a larger organization
  and the level of interdependence or independence,
  i.e. financial, services, autonomy, and brand.

15
Eligibility Criterion D Contd

• In regards to scope decisions
• Provides recognition of national systems, local
  contexts, and regulatory environments in scope
  decisions. School must explain and document.
• Provides clarity to the dimension,
  Branding/Distinctiveness, to extend our review
  of excludable programs to title, published
  descriptions, and representations to potential
  students, faculty, and employers

16
Standard 1(subject to approval in April)

• All interpretive materials previously included in
  Standard 2 relative to mission and mission
  statements (i.e., appropriate for higher
  education and consistency with the mission of the
  larger institution) are moved to Standard 1 in
  tact without change.

17
Standard 2

• Basis for Judgment (applies to acct
  accreditation)
• Infrastructure and processes to facilitate IC
  production expected
• Documentation necessary where IC portfolio relies
  on outputs from faculty who have primary
  appointments at other institutions (relationship
  with school and individuals, support of mission,
  etc.)

18
Standard 2 Contd

• Guidance for Documentation
• Demonstrate infrastructure, policies, and
  processes supporting IC production
• Present 5-year summary of IC portfolio using
  Table 2-1 (required). Table 2-2 optional. Tables
  attached to handout
• Provide analysis of value of schools IC
  efforts and how substantial cross-section in
  each discipline is achieved.

19
Standard 2 Contd

• Introductory paragraph follows Guidance for
  Documentation
• Outlines importance of ICs, i.e., advance
  knowledge, intellectual vibrancy, and
  responsibility as members of the academic
  community
• Addition to list of examples of ICs
• Non-peer reviewed ICs for which the school can
  provide substantive support for quality

20
Standards 3 and 6

• Standard 3 Guidance for Documentation
• Describe how student population served is
  consistent with mission
• Standard 6 Basis for Judgment
• Demonstrate how school prepares students for
  success in degree programs
• If admission policies are not under the control
  of the business school, demonstrate how students
  are prepared for success in degree programs
  consistent with mission

21
Standard 9

• Basis for Judgment (applies to acct
  accreditation)
• Participating faculty do not have to be
  full-time
• If faculty model has different levels support for
  classroom instruction, school must document how
  this support high quality and meets the
  student-faculty interaction principles
• If substantial proportion of faculty have primary
  appointments with other institutions, school must
  document how the model supports mission
  achievement, overall high quality, and the
  spirit and intent of Standard 9

22
Standard 9 Contd

• Guidance for Documentation
• Describe faculty compliment available to fulfill
  mission and support instructional programs
• Demonstrate how faculty and support staff fulfill
  functions of curriculum development, course
  development, course delivery, academic
  assistance, academic advising, career advising,
  and other activities that support mission
• Introductory paragraph follows Guidance for
  Documentation outlining importance of faculty
  sufficiency

23
Standard 9 Contd

• Examples of Table 9-1 reduced to one and
  footnotes used to describe various metrics to
  measuring teaching
• Table 9-1 modified to request footnote
  explanation of criteria for participating and
  supporting status (copy attached)

24
Standard 10

• Basis for Judgment (applies to acct accred)
• Qualified faculty resources are distributed
  across programs, disciplines, and locations
  consistent with the schools mission. Variations
  from the overall percentages may be justified at
  the program, discipline, or location level. The
  burden of proof is on the school to demonstrate
  the delivery of overall high quality in such
  cases.

25
Standard 10 Contd

• Basis for Judgment
• Guidance on criteria for AQ/PQ status edited for
  clarity
• Introductory paragraph added following Guidance
  for Documentation on the importance of deploying
  qualified faculty who are current in their
  teaching fields

26
Standard 10 Contd

• Example 2, 3, and 4 of AQ faculty
• Language added reinforcing the importance of
  supplemental development activities when the
  degree is not in the primary teaching field
  indicating the greater the disparity, more
  development activity is needed to support AQ
  status

27
Standard 10 Contd

• Under Expectations of the Standard Regarding
  Qualifications
• Language added to clearly state that AQ and PQ
  status can be lost if there is inadequate
  evidence of development activities within the
  past five years demonstrating currency in the
  field of teaching

28
Standard 10 Contd

• Table 10-1 revised to reflect standards intent
  that development activities to maintain AQ/PQ
  status may encompass intellectual contributions,
  professional experience, consulting, professional
  development, and other professional activities
  (copy attached)
• Note This change reflects the original intent of
  Standard 10

29
Standard 13

• Guidance for Documentation
• School should document activities that support
  continuous improvement in instructional methods

30
Introduction to AoL Standards

• Language added to several examples of assessment
  activities clarifying that remediation of
  individual students who do not perform well on
  specific assessment tools is not an AACSB
  expectation

31
Standards 15, 18, 19, and 21

• Guidance for Documentation
• Show how the curriculum across the dimensions
  outlined in the standard demonstrate a global
  perspective

32
De Minima and Other Changes
33
De Minima and Other Changes

• The term staff is replaced throughout the
  document with the term support staff.
• Last sentence of Standard 9 modified to be
  consistent with approved language about
  programs, disciplines, and locations.

34
De Minima and Other Changes Contd

• Standard 11 language regarding faculty duties
  revised to read
• Determining appropriate teaching assignments,
  intellectual expectations, and other components
  of the faculty members professional
  responsibilities to the school

35
De Minima and Other Changes

• The section of the standards document that
  includes only the standards without interpretive
  materials will be deleted from the document

36
Transition Guidance
37
Transition Guidance

• For 2009 only, all document changes (if April
  vote is affirmative) will be effective July 1,
  2009
• For reviews and accreditation actions scheduled
  in July 1-December 31, 2009, schools may use the
  standards document dated January 31, 2008. Early
  adoption of revised standards (7/1/09) and
  processes is encouraged. All schools must use
  revised standards and processes effective January
  1, 2010.

38
Other Activities

• Staff working with AQC will continue to
• Explore and develop improved guidance on AQ/PQ
  status
• Review AoL progress and status and assess impact
• Develop improved guidance on term percent of
  time devoted to mission relative to Standard 10

39
Other Activities

• Encourage use of on-line Peer Review Team
  training program. Consistency of work of
  volunteers is essential to continued success
• Document length is a concern and schools are
  strongly encouraged to follow the AACSB guidance
  on this

40
Questions and Discussion