Developing skills to formulate responses that address the strengths and weaknesses of the institution or program.

Questions to ask your accreditation agency:

• Who is typically included in the exit interview(s)?
• What are the responsibilities of the meeting chair and how is the chair selected?
• What type of recommendations, if any, is the team allowed to make?
• Who makes the final accreditation decision?
• How much time is provided to prepare for the exit interview?
• What, if any written documents are left after the interview?

The evaluation team's on-site visit concludes with one or more exit interviews with selected academic officers and administrators (Deans, Presidents, Vice Presidents for Academic Affairs, and Provosts). Exit interviews provide the opportunity for the team to relate its findings to the individuals responsible for improving the institution and its academic programs. The exit interview should discuss all of the major issues noted by the evaluation team during the visit; including important concerns voiced by students, faculty and deans that are related to the the agency's standards. For example, the team may ask a dean whether his or her program has any pressing issues that need to be brought to the university's upper administration. If the issues have merit based on the standards, the team will present them to the administration and document them in the written reports. Even though an issue may seem negative, having it brought to light by the team provides leverage for program and university administrators to obtain support for change and resources through the campus or state legislatures.

The general format for an exit interviews is as follows:

1. Summary of the gains made since the last on-site evaluation.
2. Overview of the strengths and weakness of the program or institution as identified by the self-study and by the evaluation team.
3. Presentation of the major findings of the evaluation team, organized in the following manner:
   1. A synopsis of the strengths of the program in the view of the evaluation team.
   2. Review of needed improvements, organized by the accreditation standards.
   3. Suggestions for specific steps for improvements if appropriate
4. In some agencies, the team is also empowered to render accreditation decisions at the end of the visit; if not, the agency's governing board makes the decision based on information from the team.

The details of the team's presentation are discussed prior to the exit interviews. As is the case with other sessions, a designated chair leads each exit interview with support from the rest of the evaluation team. The team's findings are also written in a report or a summary letter that is sent to the school and accreditation agency. With this in mind, the team must take care to verbally mention all major issues that will be included in the the written report. If the institution and the site-visit team have undertaken this and all other aspects of the self-study process properly, there are generally few surprises in either the exit interview or written reports.