Accreditation & Affiliations

Armen Der Kiureghian, Interim President Brent Anders, Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Vardan Baghdasaryan, Associate Professor, College of Business and Economics Meghedi Baghoomian, Student Council Representative Monika Ghavalyan, Student Council Representative Talin Grigorian, Lecturer College of Humanities and Social Sciences Aram Hajian, Dean of College of Science and Engineering Anahit Ordyan, Assistant Vice President Irshat Madyarov, Associate Professor, Teaching English as a Foreign Language Caren Meghreblian, Secretary to the Board and Accreditation Advisor Sharistan Melkonian, Dean of General Education; Accreditation Liaison Officer Mariam Mikhaylova, Director of Student Affairs Rafik Santrosyan, Faculty Senate representative

Reaffirmation of Accreditation Operational Task Force

Brent Anders, Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Aram Hajian, Dean, College of Science and Engineering Sharistan Melkonian, Dean of General Education Anahit Ordyan, Assistant Vice President

Working Group. Theme 1: Integrity of the Undergraduate Degree

Satenik Avakian. Director of the Library Vardan Baghdasaryan, Associate Professor, College of Business and Economics Suzanne Daghlian, Lecturer, Freshman Seminar Coordinator Aram Hajian, Dean, College of Science and Engineering (Chairperson) Mica Hilson, Associate Professor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences Elen Khosteghyan, Student Council Hayk Nersisyan, Associate Professor, College of Science and Engineering Jenny Paturyan, Associate Professor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences Hagop Yacoubian, Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences

Working Group: Theme 2: Academic Program Review

Alen Amirkhanian, Lecturer, Acopian Center for the Environment Adelaida Baghdasaryan, Assistant Professor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences Monika Ghavalyan, Student Council Knar Khachatryan, Vice Provost; Associate Professor, College of Business and Economics Habet Madoyan, Assistant Professor, College of Science and Engineering Sharistan Melkonian, Dean of General Education (Chairperson) Theofanis Varvoglis, Professor, College of Business and Economics Sargis Zeytunyan, Lecturer, College of Science and Engineering

Working Group: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

Chaghig Arzrouni-Chahinian, Registrar Arina Bekchyan, Director of Human Resources Mariam Mikhaylova, Director of Student Affairs Vache Gabrielyan, Dean, College of Business and Economics Meghry Khoshian, Admissions Irshat Madyarov, Associate Professor, College of Humanities and Social Sciences Anahit Ordyan, Assistant Vice President (Chairperson) Laura Prokic, Lecturer, College of Humanities and Social Sciences; Chair of Open Center for Leadership and Governance Gregory Akopian, Student  Council

2022 WSCUC Standards

 

Standard 1: Defining Institutional Mission and Acting with Integrity

Standard 2: Achieving Educational Objectives and Student Success

Standard 3: Assuring Resources and Organizational Structures

Standard 4: Creating an Institution Committed to Quality Assurance and Improvement

Standard 1: Defining Institutional Mission and Acting with Integrity

The institution defines its mission and establishes educational and student success objectives aligned with that mission. The institution has a clear sense of its essential values, culture, and distinctive elements, and its contributions to society and the public good. It promotes the success of all students and makes explicit its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The institution functions with integrity and transparency.   Criteria for Review Institutional Purposes CFR 1.1 The institution’s mission and other statements of purpose are appropriate for an institution of higher education and clearly define its essential values, culture, and ways the institution contributes to society and the public good. CFR 1.2 Consistent with its purposes and character, the institution defines and acts with intention to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in all its activities, including its goal setting, policies, practices, and use of resources, across academic, student support, and co-curricular programs and services.   Integrity and Transparency CFR 1.3 The institution operates with integrity and transparency in its operations, and truthfully and clearly represents its academic goals, programs, requirements, services, and costs. CFR 1.4 The institution maintains appropriate operating policies and business procedures including timely and fair responses to complaints and grievances. CFR 1.5 The institution treats faculty, staff, administrators, and students equitably by adhering to its published policies and procedures.   CFR 1.6 The institution maintains, publishes, and adheres to policies on academic freedom. CFR 1.7 The institution communicates about important issues with its constituents. CFR 1.8 The institution is committed to honest and open communication with the Commission and to undertaking the accreditation review process with seriousness and candor. The institution abides by Commission policies and procedures and informs the Commission promptly of any matter that could affect the accreditation status of the institution.  

Standard 2: Achieving Educational Objectives and Student Success

The institution achieves its educational and student success objectives through the core functions of teaching and learning, and through support for student learning, scholarship, and creative activity. It promotes the success of all students and makes explicit its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The institution demonstrates that core functions are performed effectively by evaluating valid and reliable evidence of learning.

Criteria for Review

Degree Programs

CFR 2.1 The institution’s degree programs are appropriate in content, educational objectives, and standards of performance relevant to the level of the degree. All degrees are defined in terms of entry requirements and levels of student achievement necessary for graduation. CFR 2.2 Degree programs engage students in an integrated course of study of sufficient breadth and depth. These programs ensure the development of core and professional competencies relevant to the level of the degree. CFR 2.3 The institution clearly identifies and effectively implements student learning outcomes and expectations for achievement. These outcomes and expectations are reflected in and supported by academic programs, policies, and curricula, and provide the framework for academic advising, student support programs and services, and information and technology resources. CFR 2.4 The institution conducts periodic reviews of its degree programs. The program review process includes analysis of student achievement of the program’s learning outcomes.  

Faculty

CFR 2.5 The institution has faculty with the capacity and scale to design and deliver the curriculum and to evaluate, improve, and promote student learning and success. CFR 2.6 The faculty exercise effective academic leadership and act consistently to ensure that the quality of academic programs and the institution’s educational purposes are sustained.   CFR 2.7 The faculty are responsible for creating and evaluating student learning outcomes and establishing standards of student performance. CFR 2.8 The institution has clear expectations for faculty research, scholarship, and creative activity that are commensurate with the mission and degree portfolio.  

Student Learning and Performance

CFR 2.9 The institution demonstrates that graduates consistently achieve stated learning outcomes and standards of performance. Faculty evaluate student work in terms of stated learning outcomes. CFR 2.10 The institution demonstrates that students make reasonable progress toward and complete their degrees in a timely manner. CFR 2.11 The institution monitors and analyzes the success of its students following graduation.  

Student Support

CFR 2.12 The institution ensures that all students understand the requirements of their academic programs and receive timely, accurate, and complete information and advising about academic requirements. CFR 2.13 The institution offers student support and co-curricular programs and services sufficient in nature, scope, and capacity to promote all students’ academic, personal, and professional development. CFR 2.14 The institution assesses the effectiveness of its student support and co-curricular programs and services and uses the results for improvement.  

Standard 3 Assuring Resources and Organizational Structures

The institution achieves its educational and student success objectives through investments in human, physical, fiscal, technology, and information resources within appropriate organizational and decision- making structures, and consistent with its explicit commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.  

Criteria for Review

Faculty, Staff, and Administrators

CFR 3.1 The institution employs faculty, staff, and administrators sufficient in scale, professional qualifications, and background to achieve the institution’s educational and student success objectives, to propose and oversee policy, and to ensure the integrity of its academic, student support, and co-curricular programs and services and administrative processes. CFR 3.2 Faculty, staff, and administrator recruitment, hiring, and orientation practices and workload expectations are aligned with institutional mission and priorities. The institution examines the extent to which its climate supports faculty, staff, and administrators and acts on its findings. CFR 3.3 The institution provides professional development and evaluation for faculty, staff, and administrators.  

Fiscal, Physical, Technology, and Information Resources

CFR 3.4 Resource planning and development include realistic budgeting, enrollment management, and diversification of revenue sources. Resource allocation is aligned with evidence-based educational and student success objectives consistent with operational and strategic planning. CFR 3.5 The institution is financially stable and has resources sufficient to ensure long-term sustainability. The institution has unqualified or unmodified independent financial audits. CFR 3.6 The institution provides physical, technology, information, and other resources sufficient in scope, quality, currency, and kind to support the work of its faculty, staff, administrators, and students. Organizational Structures and Decision-Making Processes CFR 3.7 The institution operates with appropriate autonomy governed by an independent board or similar authority that is responsible for mission, integrity, and oversight of planning, policies, performance, and sustainability. The governing board selects and evaluates the chief executive officer. CFR 3.8 The board members have a range of backgrounds, knowledge, and skills to carry out their responsibilities. CFR 3.9 The institution has sufficient and qualified leadership capacity at all levels, characterized by integrity, appropriate responsibility, high performance, and accountability. CFR 3.10 Data are regularly and systematically disseminated internally and externally, and analyzed, interpreted, and applied in institutional decision-making. CFR 3.11 The institution’s organizational structures and decision-making processes are clearly defined, consistent, and transparent, support effective decision-making and risk management, and place priority on sustaining institutional resilience and educational effectiveness.  

Standard 4: Creating an Institution Committed to Quality Assurance and Improvement

The institution engages in sustained, evidence-based, and participatory reflection about how effectively it is accomplishing its mission, achieving its educational and student success objectives, and realizing its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The institution envisions its future in light of the changing environment of higher education. These activities inform both institutional planning and systematic evaluations of educational effectiveness.  

Criteria for Review

Quality Assurance Processes

CFR 4.1 The institution employs comprehensive quality assurance processes in both academic and non- academic areas and uses the results to improve institutional operations. CFR 4.2 The institution collects, analyzes and acts on disaggregated student outcomes data including retention and graduation rates. CFR 4.3 The institution examines the extent to which its climate supports student success and acts on its findings. The institution regularly assesses the characteristics, experiences, and performance of its students and uses this evidence to improve student success. CFR 4.4 The institution has institutional research capacity, scope, and coordination consistent with its purposes and characteristics.  

Institutional Improvement

CFR 4.5 The institution demonstrates improvement based on the results of inquiry, evidence, and evaluation. CFR 4.6 The institution, with significant faculty involvement, engages in continuous inquiry into the processes of teaching and learning, and the conditions and practices that ensure that the institution’s standards of performance are being achieved.   CFR 4.7 The governing board engages in self-evaluation and development. CFR 4.8 The institution periodically engages its stakeholders in reflection and planning processes based on the examination of evidence. Through these processes it assesses the institution’s strategic position, articulates priorities, examines the alignment of its purposes, core functions, and resources, and defines the future direction of the institution.

1) Who is WSCUC?

The WASC Senior College and University Commission is one of several regional accrediting associations covering the United States, whose purpose is continual improvement of education and cooperation among educational institutions and agencies. The Western Association of Schools and Colleges, (WASC) was formed in July 1962, to evaluate and accredit schools, colleges, and universities in California, Hawaii, Guam, and the Pacific island Trust Territories. In 2012-2013, WASC changed its name to WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC) to “reflect its new separate incorporation as a California nonprofit. This change is in response to findings of noncompliance with the “separate and independent” requirement of the federal regulations affecting our recognition by the US Department of Education.” See http://www.wascsenior.org/annoucements/new-wasc-corporate-structure-and-name) WSCUC is reviewed periodically for renewal of recognition by the US Department of Education and by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).  

2) What is Accreditation?

Accreditation is a voluntary process involving an association of schools and/or colleges to encourage high standards of education. Accreditation indicates that WSCUC judges that the institution, in a manner consistent with standards, offers its students on a satisfactory level the educational opportunities implied in its objectives and is likely to continue to do so. Voluntary, nongovernmental, institutional accreditation as practiced by WSCUC and the other regional commissions is a unique characteristic of American education. In many other countries the maintenance of educational standards is a governmental function. While WSCUC works to establish minimum standards of quality for institutions, its primary focus is to foster educational excellence. Each institution has the responsibility of defining, for itself, characteristics of quality and excellence, and presenting evidence that such quality and excellence is being achieved.  

3) What does the accreditation process entail?

In 2013, WSCUC revised its Standards of Accreditation and the accreditation process. The heart of the accreditation process is the Institutional Report which includes an in-depth Self-Study. The Self-Study serves both external and internal purposes. It provides an opportunity within the AUA community for broad based deliberation on the current state of the institution, its successes in fulfilling its mission, its areas of special strength and those in need of improvement, as well as the direction for development in the years ahead. Commission standards define normative expectations and characteristics of excellence and provide a framework for self-study. Ultimately, the report of the self study provides the basis for demonstrating that AUA is in compliance the Standards of Accreditation. The accreditation process itself assists institutions in “developing and sustaining effective educational programs and assures the educational community, the general public, and other organizations that an accredited institution has met high standards of quality and effectiveness.” (See http://www.wascsenior.org/about/purposeofaccreditation)  

4) What are the Standards of Accreditation?

STANDARD 1: Defining Institutional Purposes and Ensuring Educational Objectives STANDARD 2: Achieving Educational Objectives Through Core Functions STANDARD 3: Developing and Applying Resources and Organizational Structures to Ensure Quality and Sustainability STANDARD 4: Creating an Organization Committed to Quality Assurance, Institutional Learning and Improvement  

5) How does AUA benefit from accreditation?

The American University of Armenia has seen tremendous benefits as a result of its U.S.-accreditation in terms of its students, faculty, and staff, as well as the community at large.  U.S.-accreditation directly benefits students by simplifying degree verification, enabling students to more easily continue their studies in universities in the United States and Europe, and acknowledging AUA as a quality institution which broadens future career and educational opportunities.  Faculty benefit by being part of an internationally-recognized community of scholars. The university benefits by ensuring evidence-based and continuous process improvement, as well as a diversity among its faculty and students. And, society benefits because AUA graduates transition into the labor market with highly employable skills such as problem solving, creativity, leadership, and critical thinking. Please feel free to e-mail any comments and/or suggestions to the Accreditation Liaison Officer and Director of Accreditation at [email protected].  

6) Where is AUA in the Accreditation Process? 

• Institutional Proposal
• Capacity and Preparatory Review
• Educational Effectiveness Review

• Capacity and Preparatory Review Report
• Educational Effectiveness Review Report

• Strategic Plan 2016-2022
• Strategic Plan 2016-2022. August 4 2016

Process and Documentation:

• Drafts: March 1, 2016

 

• University-wide Strategic Planning Retreat: February 6, 2016
   – Strategic Planning Retreat Mission Worksheet – Strategic Planning Retreat Vision Worksheet – Strategic Planning Retreat Institutional Goals and Action Priorities Worksheet
• Second Phase Input Consolidated February 3, 2016
• Second Phase Worksheets Colleges School Units: Due January 29, 2016
• Through October, 2015: Compilation of SWOT Analysis (Students, Staff, Faculty)
• October 5, 2015: Student SWOT Analysis Brainstorming
• September 29, 2015: Faculty and Staff SWOT Analysis Brainstorming

Reports and other documentation:

• Qualitative Research to Support AUA Strategic Planning Turpanjian Center for Policy Analysis February 2016