Self-Study Design

The self-study process covered two years and involved dozens of staff, faculty, and students. Working groups were formed to focus on each standard and met regularly to investigate, analyze, review, and discuss the findings of their research. From these discussions, evidence and a “state of the standard” was derived. Next, a centralized effort was applied to drafting the findings of each working group and returning it to the members for validation, clarification, or requests for additional research. The working groups retained complete editorial control over the content. Once revised by the committee, the working group rejoined with the other standards and coalesced their content into a draft version of the report. This report was edited as a whole and, again, any call for further explanation or deliberation was returned to the appropriate working group. After this second round of collation and editing, the report was escalated to senior leadership for review. The membership of the steering committees can be accessed here.

Research Questions for Each Standard

In addition to aligning each standard with MCCC’s priorities, each standard working team developed research questions for their Standard.

Standard I – Mission and Goals

• How do the mission and goals of Mercer County Community College guide and inform learning and student success, program development, resource allocation, and planning?
• How have the community and the environment Mercer County Community College operates in changed in the past ten years as measured by demographics, economy, technology, employment, and emerging societal expectations?
• How do the mission and goals of Mercer County Community College address the real motivation to increase the recruitment, retention, and completion rates of men of color as compared with other groups including women?
• How do the College’s mission and goals ensure that equitable, accessible, and inclusive resources are made available to all we serve, in accordance with all compliance standards?
• Finally, how do our mission and goals inform and challenge the other six Standards?

Standard II – Ethics and Integrity  

• How do the Mercer County Community College’s policies support the College’s commitment to academic freedom, intellectual freedom, and respect for intellectual property rights?
• How does the College’s public relations and communications strategy support a cohesive message to our internal and external stakeholders?
• What processes are in place to ensure periodic review and assessment of our institution policies, processes, and practice and support it currently and for the future?

Standard III – Design, Delivery Student Learning Experience

• How does Mercer provide students with learning experiences that are characterized by rigor and coherence (at all program, certificate, and degree levels)?
• How does Mercer provide an educational experience that is aligned with the mission & vision of the College?
• How does Mercer periodically assess the effectiveness of programs providing student learning opportunities?
• How does Mercer ensure academic programs of study are clearly and accurately described in official publications of the institution in a way that students are able to understand and follow degree and program requirements and expected time to completion?
• How does Mercer identify and provide professional development to support student learning?

Standard IV – Support of the Student Experience

• Based on the institution’s established programs and educational offerings, how are efforts in recruitment, admissions, advisement, and retention inclusive of students’ interests, leadership abilities, physical and mental wellness, extra-curricular/social experiences, and goals? In turn, how are these programs representative of the institution’s mission and priorities?
• Which policies articulate the institution’s ethical and professional commitment to student retention, persistence, completion, and success? How do these processes enforce accurate and comprehensive information to enhance the achievement opportunity for students’ educational and enrichment goals that promotes a fully encompassed academic experience?
• How does the institution evaluate the effectiveness its current processes, using data-driven decision-making? Are there areas in which the College could augment or supplement the systems to recruit, advise, and retain its students to enhance and navigate the holistic collegiate experience?
• Does the institution proactively seek to limit barriers and identify improvements which could prohibit a successful, holistic student experience? Does the institution make their procedures clear and accessible, including but not limited to the following: start/end dates for the registration period, financial aid deadlines, tuition payment procedures, academic program outlines, transfer equivalency processes, release and maintenance of student records?
• Does the institution provide the necessary resources to ensure a successful student experience (i.e., personnel, academic research tools, software and hardware relative to Student Planning and Success, learning competencies, etc.)? 

Standard V – Educational Effectiveness Assessment

• Upon review of the college's many varied academic programs, what are key examples of how the college conducts course-specific and program-specific assessment? What is the frequency, format and subject of the demonstrated assessments?
  • To what extent have multiple measures for English and Math placement increased access to college-level courses, changed pedagogy and curriculum, and subsequently improved key indicators of student success? What revisions to multiple measures were implemented, if any, as data emerged?
• Upon review of the college's many varied academic programs, what are key examples that demonstrate how program coordinators have used assessment results to revise and improve their assigned programs? How does this assessment align with the college’s institutional goals?
  • How can we revise the Program Review guidelines to ensure programs are assessing the effectiveness of past initiatives and then using that data to modify current practice and create new initiatives? How can we revise the Program Review guidelines to encourage a cycle of continual re-assessment of new revisions and initiatives?
  • How do our assessments incorporate student demographic categories to ensure that all students benefit from curricular or pedagogical shifts?
• Upon review of the college's three academic divisions, what are key examples of how the division's deans and faculty use assessment results to support courses, programs, and academics within the divisions?
  • What are the best examples of how administrators at the VP and above level use program-specific assessment for budgeting?
  • How are assessment results used for funding for student academic support services?
  • How are we continually improving because of this process? (Ex: success coaches, implementation of new advising software)
  • What kind of non-financial support do faculty and staff need? (Ex: Criminal Law course, college-wide, interdisciplinary collaboration and support)
  • What do students say they need and how do they report being supported by MCCC?
• How can we build a process of regular monitoring, evaluation, and improvement of our assessment procedures?

Standard VI – Planning, Resource, and Institutional Improvement

• Does your program/department/area have goals linked to the MCCC strategic plan?
  • How and with who were they developed?
  • How do you track Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for these goals?
  • How was budget development tied to these goals?
  • As priorities shift, how are resources re-aligned? (Human, information, capital, and financial resources should all be considered.)
• How are resource needs identified, communicated, and resolved?
  • What has the impact of the academic program review process been in this regard?
  • Outside of curriculum, how are program goals tied to MCCC's strategic goals?
• Describe the institutional processes for aligning the resources provided by your unit with the needs of the college at both a strategic and operational level?
  • Do formal plans exist that describe such processes?
  • As priorities shift, how are resources re-aligned? 

Standard VII – Governance, Leadership, and Administration

• How are the Board of Trustees and Foundation Board evaluated/assessed? How effective are both?
• How is the governance structure, including Student Government, evaluated/assessed? How effective is it?
• How are President Leadership Team members evaluated? How effective is our administrative system/structure?
• To what extent do our administrative and governance systems support our equity mission?

Intended Outcomes of the Self-Study  

The following are expected outcomes of the Self-Study.

• Demonstrating compliance with MSCHE Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation
• Achieving continuous improvements in MCCC’s strategic goals and institutional priorities.
• Engage all stakeholders in MCCC’s robust assessment culture to include theentire Mercer community in this process and our continuous
• Enhancing MCCC’s Strategic Plan implementation and

Self-Study Approach

MCCC decided on the Standards-Based Approach to the Self-Study. Each Self-Study Committee has been assigned to one of the seven MSCHE Standards. Utilizing this approach will ensure MCCC is meeting the expectations for each Standard and criterion while also incorporating the Institutional Priorities where appropriate in each Standard.

Organizational Structure of the Steering Committee and Working Groups

The Steering Committee consist of the two Co-chairs as well as Co-chairs for each of the seven standards (see associated details). The Steering Committee offers oversight to the all the members in order to facilitate the process and progress to address ultimate compliance with all the Standards. The Steering Committee will review and evaluate as well as ensure that MCCC meets the expected Requirements of Affiliation. The ultimate goal for each of the seven subcommittees is to collaborate with and support the efforts and charge of the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee and members of each subcommittee consist of mostly faculty and staff who were identified based on their experience and expertise which then aligns with the content of each Standard. The members, titles, and Self-Study roles can be seen on the working groups web page.

Organization of the Final Self-Study Report

At this point in time, the organization for the final Self-Study Report is expected to be as listed below. This will be the outline the Self-Study committee will follow with the understanding that this outline may expand if appropriate.

• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Chapter for each MSCH Standard
  • A heading indicating Standard/priority under consideration;
  • Cross-references to relevant materials in other parts of the report and withinthe Evidence Inventory;
  • Analytically-based inquiry and reflection;
  • Conclusions, including strengths and challenges, with references to appropriate Criteria; and
  • Opportunities for ongoing institutional improvement and
• Conclusion

Verification of Institutional Federal Compliance Report Strategy

As previously mentioned, some members of the Steering Committee will be the responsible group for the completion of the Verification of Institutional Federal Compliance Strategy. The subcommittee of the Steering Committee will tap into their experience and expertise to address and develop this report. This communication and collaboration among all Standards and all members will be critical to the success of this process. There may also be an opportunity to request some information from other experts on the college campus if more information is necessary.

Self-Study Communication Plan

Self-Study Timeline

Compatible Peer Institutions

 Names, city, and state of the compatible peer institutions within the Middle States region.

• Anne Arundel Community College (Arnold, MD)
• Bergen Community College (Paramus, NJ)
• Brookdale Community College (Lincroft, NJ)
• Bucks County Community College (Newtown, PA)
• Camden County College (Blackwood, NJ)
• Community College of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh, PA)
• CUNY Borough of Manhattan Community College (New York, NY)
• CUNY Kingsborough Community College (Brooklyn, NY)
• CUNY LaGuardia Community College (Long Island City, NY)
• CUNY Queensborough Community College (Bayside, NY)
• Delaware County Community College (Media, PA)
• Hudson Valley Community College (Troy, NY)
• Middlesex County College (Edison, NJ)
• Monroe Community College (Rochester, NY)
• Montgomery County Community College (Blue Bell, PA)
• Prince George's Community College (Largo, MD)
• Union County College (Cranford, NJ)

Evidence Inventory

MCCC’s Self-Study Steering Committee and each Standard Working Group will be using Microsoft Teams to hold all Steering Committee and subcommittee meetings. Files have been created for each Standard and committee to house the documents needed for the Self-Study. MSCHE resources and MCCC-developed templates are also stored and utilized via this repository.