The Steering Committee emphasized the importance accorded to the tasks being undertaken in the self-study. Chaired by the Provost, the Steering Committee included chairs of the five Criterion Committees, the President, Vice President Business and Finance, Associate Director of Athletics, the Chief Information Officer, and Self-Study Coordinator.  The Committee met for the first time in June 2004 and began to discuss the new accreditation criteria. Working with committee chairs, the Steering Committee appointed members for each of the five criterion committees.

On September 10, 2004 the Self-Study officially kicked off with a lunch and orientation for all self-study committee members. At that event members were introduced to the process, the self-study criteria, and to Drake’s commitment to using the process for real self-study.

Each committee was first asked to consider how examining the University using their criterion and its components could help Drake University better achieve its mission.  These deliberations led to several major campus initiatives.  During succeeding years, the committees identified evidence and drafted information for the Self-Study Report.  With normal transition among chairs and members, the committees continued top meet through spring 2007 when they submitted reports to the Self-Study Coordinator and primary writer.  In addition to the steering and criterion committees, a Publicity and Promotion Task Force worked to recommend ways to get the campus involved in the self-study process, a Logistics Committee prepared for the team visit, and numerous individuals across campus contributed to the process.

CAMPUS AND CONSTITUENT INVOLVEMENT

Consistent with Drake’s approach to major policy and procedure initiatives, constant communication and opportunity for involvement have characterized the self-study. Given the importance of the initiatives being undertaken as part of the process, it was considered essential to involve all campus constituents in the self-study.

At several points faculty, staff and students have been invited to volunteer for committees. Communication about the self-study to students, faculty, staff, Board of Trustees members, and other constituents occurred regularly. The Monday morning Provost’s Announcements carried information about the self-study and related initiatives to all constituents.  Articles in all-campus publications, including OnCampus, Blue, eBlue, and The Times Delphic  focused on the self-study and related initiatives.

The self-study process was the focus of the President’s Summer Planning Retreats in 2004 and 2006. The day-and-a-half Summer 2004 Retreat provided the first forum for intensive discussion of the self-study process with campus constituents. Principles of accreditation were reviewed, the self-study process was outlined, and the importance of developing a culture of evidence was presented. Administrators, faculty, staff and student leaders discussed the crosscutting themes, exploring their potential for framing the Drake approach to the self-study. The group spent extensive time becoming familiar with the self-study criteria and examining their implications for the University.

The goals of the 2006 President’s Summer Retreat were to continue preparation for the self-study and to launch the next round of strategic planning. Faculty, staff, students and Board of Trustees members were asked, based on analysis using the HLC criteria and crosscutting themes, to identify themes to be emphasized in the self-study report.

Presentations about the self-study and related initiatives have been made regularly to Drake constituents. These have included the Student Senate, Faculty Senate, All-Staff Council, faculty and staff of each of the schools and colleges and library, staff members of Athletics, Business and Finance, Alumni and Development, Office of Information Technology, Marketing and Communications, and Student Life. The Board of Trustees, particularly its Academic Affairs Committee, has been kept apprised of progress on the self-study, as have the Parents Board, Alumni Board, and National Advisory Boards/Committees of the schools and colleges.  In addition, as committees have worked on their reports, they have met with various campus groups to obtain ideas and feedback.

USING THE CRITERIA TO PROMOTE CHANGE

The expectation that the self-study criteria would promote campus conversation and help identify areas that needed attention proved accurate. 

THE MISSION EXPLICATION
First, and among the most significant initiatives to arise from self-study, was development of the Drake University Mission Explication. Discussions by Criterion 1 and 3 committees made clear that while we perceived ourselves to be mission-driven, the full implications of the mission for students, faculty and staff of the University had not been clarified.  The Mission Explication (fully discussed in Criterion 1 and Criterion 3 chapters) emerged from a campus-wide discussion as a living commitment to the Drake mission.

A CULTURE OF EVIDENCE
Early in the self-study process the campus started to focus on developing a culture of evidence. The University established an Office of Institutional Research and regularly participated in a range of surveys and other forms of data collection. The self-study process helped raise awareness that decision-making at Drake should be more consistently driven by data. An Institutional Research Web site has been established and a new position, Associate Director of Institutional Research, has allowed the University to be more systematic in putting data in forms that can be used effectively by the entire campus.

DRAKE CURRICULUM REVIEW
As we embarked on the self-study process, we were aware that assessment of learning outcomes was irregular across campus and had not been adequately implemented in relation to the Drake Curriculum general education program. The Criterion 3 committee, with representation from all curricular units and Student Life, initiated a systematic review of Drake’s assessment of learning outcomes. The Criterion 3 Committee brought speakers to campus to provide workshops and, planned campus-run activities and workshops to help faculty better understand the importance of assessment and how to implement assessment procedures in their own programs and courses.  Criterion 3 and Criterion 4 committees organized and coordinated a complete review of the Drake Curriculum general education program during the 2004–05 and 2005–06 academic years and summers. These committees worked with the Office of the Provost to develop the proposal that resulted in Drake’s participation in the initial Higher Learning Commission Assessment Academy.

SYSTEMATIZED PLANNING
In fall 2005, the Criterion 2 Committee began to discuss the University’s lack of an institutionalized planning process. Although the University was engaged in strong, mission-driven planning, including regular updates of the Strategic Plan, strategic budgeting and other procedures, these all depended on the individual commitment of the President, his cabinet and other administrators. The Criterion 2 committee first developed guidelines for strategic planning by University operational units. The committee then examined planning models, developing a new Three-year Planning Cycle endorsed by the President’s Cabinet and the Faculty Senate; it has now been implemented.

COMMITMENT TO SELF-EXAMINATION
Many of Drake’s initiatives of the past four years might have been pursued even had the self-study not been under way. But during the past several years most activities have been to some extent affected by the commitment to intensive self-examination. These have included our commitment to continuing progress on campus diversity, to excellent technology support for learning, upgrading classroom and laboratory learning environments, and to faculty and staff compensation that allows us to attract and maintain the faculty and staff necessary to support an outstanding institution.Thus, as we complete the four-year self-study, Drake University is committed to maintaining an ongoing self-examination.

THE SELF-STUDY REPORT

In fall 2006, self-study committees focused on drafting sections of the report and bringing together the lists of evidence that supported their statements. These were submitted in the spring to the Self-Study Coordinator, who was the primary writer. During the summer and early fall of 2007, notes and evidence were drawn into chapters that were sent to the criterion committees for review and editing. The report was then made available to all members of all committees, deans and other administrators, and anyone who might be able to provide helpful feedback on the report.  The report was completed and distributed in mid-December, 2007.