Contact Courses Professional Study Aids Glossaries Key Links Purpose      

LOGOS


NEASC INTEGRITY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
April 16, 2003

 


Draft Report Revisions

1. John Ribezzo’s recommendations (all on p. 5):

  • Should (Frozen number of FTEs), in the first bullet, be preceded by e.g.?
  • Should “FTE” be spelled out?
  • The second sentence, in the third bullet, should add “other” to "communicate and collaborate with each …"


2. Steering Committee recommendations (from 4/11 meeting):

  • Rank strengths and weaknesses according to their respective degrees of strength and weakness. Such a ranking will present the data more precisely and consequently be more informative to the visiting accreditation team.
  • Address all Neasc accreditation standards in your report (I believe we omitted #s 8 and 9, which are about the institution’s relation to CIHE accreditation issues). See below:
     
    • 11.8 In its relationships with the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education, the institution demonstrates honesty and integrity, and it complies with the Commission’s Standards, policies, and requests.
    • 11.9 In addition to the considerations stated in this Standard, the institution adheres to those requirements related to institutional integrity embodied in all other Commission Standards.


3. Committee recommendations for our 2114 CCRI Integrity committee colleagues

4. Plans for a committee celebration of the completion of our project????


CCRI Home