As UCSD approached the creation of its Institutional Proposal, we first developed a widely based institutional commitment to the reaffirmation process and a broad consensus on those issues whose investigation would most benefit the campus in general and, more specifically, undergraduate education.To this end, three standing committees, including one existing committee, were engaged in creating the Institutional Proposal and for guiding the reaffirmation process from start to finish.The first is the Executive Steering Committee, whose function is to guide the overall approach to our reaffirmation process, including our selection of a study approach. This committee, appointed by Chancellor Fox, is composed of faculty and administrative leaders who will serve in this capacity throughout the reaffirmation process.
The second is the Senate-Administration Advisory Committee, whose membership was selected by the Academic Senate's Committee on Committees (for faculty membership on the committee) and University administration (for the members from administration).This Committee was charged with establishing the themes of reaffirmation proposal and the approaches that would be taken.The Associated Students of UCSD, the campus student governance association, appointed five undergraduate student associates to serve on the committee.The committee, including its student associates, operates with four subgroups.Each student serves on a work group to plan detailed approaches to the four themes of inquiry. Membership on this committee may change as the reaffirmation process develops, but members will be encouraged to stay involved as long as possible.Clearly, the student associates will rotate over time.
The third is the Institutional Research Coordinating Committee (IRCC) which was charged to coordinate the gathering, analysis, and presentation of the data elements used throughout the reaffirmation process in addition to its other functions.The IRCC is a relatively new committee appointed by the Chancellor and one whose creation was, in part, a result of recommendations made during UCSD's last reaffirmation. The membership of each of these committees is listed in Appendix 3.
Finally, involvement of the entire campus has been solicited and encouraged through the creation of a publicly accessible website. The Chancellor has encouraged the campus community to participate in the process and make comments via the website at http://accreditation.ucsd.edu . (See Appendix 4.A and 4.B)
During the development of the Institutional Proposal, extensive consultation was held with the many constituent groups.These included discussions with academic department heads, divisional deans, college provosts, key Senate committees and leadership-including the Senate Council-and student groups.Each of the campus accreditation committees reviewed drafts of the proposal, and members of the committees were encouraged to discuss both the general framework of the proposal as well as details of the self-study plan.Further, because our approach links the topics of inquiry with the campus' efforts to continuously improve, the campus is currently pilot testing two of the proposed topics, freshman and entry-level writing and undergraduate program review.The pilot testing brought many of the constituent groups, i.e., academic departments, the Academic Senate's Committee on Education Policy, the directors of writing programs, and the college provosts, into the process at the level of involvement that parallels that of the next stages of the accreditation inquiry.