Texas Tech University

November 2020 OPA Blog

Common Areas of Non-Compliance with SACSCOC

As Texas Tech prepares its Fifth Year Report to SACSCOC, I wanted to share some common areas of non-compliance with all of you. I've included a chart below that was provided by SACSCOC, and I think you'll find it to be informative and instructive. This chart tells us which standards are most commonly cited as non-compliant at each of the three review stages for SACSCOC.

In case you don't know, SACSCOC is a peer-led institution, which means that we are guided and regulated by our peers. SACSCOC organizes peer teams to review each institution's documentation around nearly 100 standards. A different team of reviewers examines our evidence in three stages: 1) an off-site committee review; 2) an on-site committee review, and 3) SACSCOC Board of Trustees. These three separate groups of peers determine our compliance status with SACSCOC.

As the chart demonstrates below, almost 92% of all institutions were found to be non-compliant with faculty qualifications (6.2.a) at the first stage of review (i.e., off-site committee review). However, by the time this standard was reviewed by the Board of Trustees in the third review stage, only 6% of institutions were found non-compliant. Similarly, 61% of institutions were found non-compliant with assessing student learning outcomes (8.2.a) in the first stage or review, and by the Board of Trustees review, this number dropped to 12%. These changes in compliance status tell us that documentation matters! The cleaner our documentation at the off-site committee, the better! All of your Nuventive Improve reports are submitted for compliance with 8.2.a, so please know that all of your effort is indeed reviewed by Texas Tech and by SACSCOC.

Top Cited Problems

Office of Planning and Assessment