NAACLS News









News



SEARCH:

 

JUMP:

National Accrediting
Agency for Clinical
Laboratory Sciences
5600 N River Rd
Suite 720
Rosemont, IL 60018

773.714.8880
773.714.8886 (FAX)

info@naacls.org
http://www.naacls.org


NAACLS logo



Get Acrobat Reader





Archives









Volume 71 - Winter 1999



Progress Reports for Initial Programs
encouraging effective program evaluation
by Monica Mitchell, MA
Administrative Liaison

Often an initial program's first accreditation or approval review by NAACLS may occur before program evaluation mechanisms have been implemented. Initial programs may be unable to demonstrate compliance with the Essentials or Standards that fall under Section IV, Program Evaluation. Subsequently, NAACLS requires all initial programs to submit progress reports that document compliance with those Essentials or Standards.

While the numbering may differ depending on program level, the following Essentials/Standards are those that fall into the Program

Evaluation category:

  • The program must have a continuing system for periodically and systematically reviewing the effectiveness of the program.
  • The results of program evaluations shall be documented and reflected in the curriculum and other elements of the program.
  • The results of program evaluations shall be documented and reflected in the curriculum and other elements of the program.

Accredited programs must also demonstrate compliance with an additional Essential under Program Evaluation:

  • A review of graduation rates and placement rates shall be documented and included in the program evaluation.

These Essentials/Standards serve to evaluate a program's effectiveness by looking at external outcome measurements such as certifying examinations. They further examine the program's ability to analyze outcome data and develop strategies and program goals for improving outcome measurements. New programs often cannot have these evaluation mechanisms in place at the time of the initial review as a result of the absence of data.

While data such as certifying scores are important, they are not the only means of monitoring program effectiveness. Programs cannot be cited for low certification scores, but can be cited for the failure to track and analyze outcome data such as low certifying exam scores. The emphasis remains on the need to develop and implement monitoring systems for program improvement.

Program success can also be ascertained through surveys, questionnaires and interviews that can effectively target faculty, students, graduates and employers. Furthermore, discussing strategic goals and performance data with faculty, administration, employers and even other program directors can make associates more aware of how their unique position can positively affect outcomes. The Self-Study Report is also a valuable tool for identifying specific areas that need extra focus or attention and for determining the strength of strategies to achieve goals.

By NAACLS requiring Progress Reports of initial programs, program directors are given the necessary time to review and analyze external outcome measurements such as certifying examinations, graduation rates and job placement in order to formulate proactive strategies. For the few initial programs that already have these evaluative mechanisms in place, strategies initially included in the Self-Study Report may be photocopied and submitted with the program's evaluation of the most recent certification examination scores. In demonstrating compliance with these Essentials or Standards, the program ensures the protection of the student, the institution and the profession.

A program's system of evaluation should be a permanent and constant mechanism that goes beyond the needs of accreditation, certification and government regulatory agencies. Continuous and dynamic program evaluation which results in ongoing and cyclical adjustments to program and institutional mission statements, strategic plans and performance targets, can have far-reaching consequences that translate into long-term success and viability for a program.








A Bold New Look: the NAACLS accreditation/approval documents
by Jennifer Zielinski, Gwen James Oriaikhi, and Monica Mitchell

A call for volunteers
by Megan Hennessy Eggert
Meetings and Publicity Coordinator

Designing professional curriculum using three taxonomic levels
by Jane Adrian, EdM, MT(ASCP)
NAACLS Site Visitor and Former CLSPRC Member

Program Revitalization: a professional priority
by Megan Hennessy Eggert
Meetings and Publicity Coordinator

Progress Reports for Initial Programs
encouraging effective program evaluation
by Monica Mitchell, MA
Administrative Liaison

Public Hearing announcement on CLS/MT Essentials



Dear Dr. NAACLS
Systematic program review

Executive Director’s corner
The Higher Education Amendments of 1998: Impact on Accreditation and Distance Learning

President’s report
by Joeline D. Davidson, MBA, CLS(NCA), MT(ASCP)
President, Board of Directors






Select an Issue     


Top

Copyright © 2008 National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences. All rights reserved.
Comments or suggestions to the site editor.





NAACLS.org Programs Students Volunteers Committees Help Accreditation Approval News About Us Search Links Home