Faculty Engagement in the Accreditation Process Issue - October 2025

SUNY Rockland Community College, located in the Hudson Valley of New York State, offers an Associate Degree Nursing Program with approximately 500 enrolled students. In February 2024, the program successfully completed its ACEN reaccreditation and was one of the earliest schools to submit a self-study report under the new ACEN standards. This milestone was particularly significant, as the year leading up to the visit brought several administrative changes: the existing Program Director assumed the role of Dean, and both a new Program Director and Assistant Program Director began their roles in September 2022. At the time the Self Study Report (SSR) was being written, the majority of full-time faculty had only been employed at the college for fewer than four years, with only two faculty members having participated in the previous reaccreditation in February 2016. This put the program at both a unique disadvantage but also an advantage as this provided the administration and faculty the opportunity to work together, learning the process with a fresh perspective.

Building Faculty Knowledge and Engagement

To prepare for the reaccreditation process, the new Program Director attended the ACEN Self-Study Forum and Program Administrators Workshop in Atlanta. The knowledge gained from these events proved essential in guiding the faculty through the standards. A “divide and conquer” approach was adopted where each nursing program committee was tasked with gathering data and drafting sections of the report, with committee assignments intentionally mixed between newer and longer-term faculty.

Faculty engagement was encouraged through weekly faculty meetings dedicated to the report, complemented by administrative review sessions each week with the Dean, Program Director, and Assistant Program Director. Drafts were refined through a cycle of committee reviews, administrative feedback, and faculty presentations. Each week, a committee presented their standard to the full faculty, often using PowerPoint slides and interactive Kahoot quizzes to make the review process engaging. Small incentives further encouraged participation. This structure not only educated faculty on the ACEN Standards but also created a sense of teamwork and collegiality, particularly among newer faculty members. This not only helped each committee member learn more in depth about their committee and standard they were then able to help extend that knowledge to all members of the full-time faculty and help strengthen everyone’s knowledge leading to increased participation and collaboration.

Strengthening Collaboration and Communication

Working together in the year-long process fostered a level of collaboration and communication that had not previously existed within the department. Weekly meetings provided an opportunity for faculty to work toward a common goal, learn about program operations, and better understand the challenges students face in a community college setting. Faculty became more familiar with institutional resources and began to more effectively direct students to services such as the College Connection Center, which provides assistance with food insecurity, housing, and other support needs. Reports of increased student use of these services followed, demonstrating the direct impact of improved faculty communication

The faculty became fully involved and committed to ensuring that the already highly regarded nursing program continued to meet the highest standards. In the process, they learned about the history of the college and the nursing program itself. Collaboration enhanced faculty meetings, increased participation from all faculty, which evolved into more engaging forums that included beneficial debates, thoughtful discussions, and improved processes benefiting students, faculty, and the program at large. For novice faculty, this experience provided critical exposure to the importance of maintaining accreditation standards and working together to uphold them, while also seeing the vision for the future of the nursing program and how these standards continue to contribute to its ongoing success.

Curriculum and Outcomes Improvements

Through data gathering, report writing, and reviewing program outcomes, faculty identified areas in need of improvement in our End-of-Program Student Learning Outcomes (EPSLOs). Faculty conversations led to innovations such as:

• Assessment and Outcomes: The program outcomes committee, which meets monthly and presents findings at both monthly faculty meetings and the Winter and Spring faculty retreats, has the role in aligning data with Expected Levels of Achievement (ELAs). Faculty in this committee have become increasingly skilled in analyzing data, which has led to responsive interventions that directly improve student learning. The committee systematically reviews data from clinical evaluations, final exams in the last semester courses, and a standardized comprehensive exam. These findings inform decision-making about how best to improve outcomes and ensure students graduate as competent nurses. Working closely with the curriculum committee and the full faculty, the outcomes committee ensures that adjustments are made thoughtfully and collaboratively so that ELSPOs are consistently met.
  ‍
• Simulation Enhancements: Faculty recognized that while lecture and theory are essential, hands-on experience is critical to reinforcing learning and improving outcomes. To address areas where students scored lower, simulations were designed to provide practical practice that directly tied to identified needs. For example, a new respiratory distress simulation was added to support success in the Adult Health II Medical-Surgical course, while a safety-focused simulation was created for Fundamentals students to address safety performance. Faculty also incorporated targeted skills practice into senior-level simulations, such as manual blood pressure measurement and restraint application, ensuring that foundational skills from earlier semesters were revisited and reinforced. These experiences help bridge gaps created by limited clinical exposure due to clinical sites limiting student activities in the clinical setting, as well as there not being an opportunity to see certain health conditions in the clinical setting since they were not present. Most recently, with the acquisition of newer high-fidelity manikins, faculty developed a seizure simulation after data revealed students struggled with seizure safety procedures. These purposeful enhancements have strengthened student preparedness and confidence in critical clinical skills.

• Student Feedback and Data Collection: An area identified by the outcomes committee as needing improvement was job placement tracking. While job placement rates were consistently high and met the ELA, faculty felt that broader participation from graduates was necessary to ensure the data was both accurate and comprehensive. To strengthen tracking efforts, several strategies were implemented. Faculty were encouraged to maintain alumni connections, and the Program Director sent targeted emails to recent graduates. Faculty members working in clinical settings where alumni were employed also helped encourage participation. Additionally, raffle incentives were introduced for graduates who completed surveys, and strong clinical partnerships were leveraged to facilitate communication with graduates. Together, these strategies have significantly improved data return rates, providing the program with more robust information to guide decision-making and demonstrate student success.

A Culture of Continuous Improvement

One of the most significant outcomes has been the cultural shift within the faculty. Accreditation is now seen not as a periodic requirement but as an ongoing process of reflection and growth. Faculty are more engaged, collaborative, and informed about the program’s mission, policies, curriculum, and outcomes. This increased involvement has led to continuous improvements that directly benefit students. Through student forums, students now report feeling better supported and more engaged, particularly through expanded simulation experiences that bridge classroom theory and clinical practice. From this reaccreditation process, faculty morale has increased, and continuous improvements have become routine activities. Faculty no longer looks at reaccreditation as intimidating but a process that they will be always prepared for.

Conclusion

The ACEN reaccreditation process at Rockland Community College has proven transformative. It educated and united a largely new faculty team, strengthened collaboration and communication, and fostered innovations in curriculum and student support. Most importantly, it reinforced a culture of continuous quality improvement that ensures our nursing graduates are prepared to meet the evolving demands of the profession with confidence and competence. Through this process, faculty and administrators alike gained deeper knowledge, strengthened their commitment to the program’s mission and vision, and bonded more closely as a team eager to continue making strides and striving for excellence.

‍

‍