HLC YEAR 4 COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION

In fulfilling its mission, the institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.

2.A. Integrity
Actions taken by the institution’s governing board, administration, faculty and staff demonstrate adherence to established policies and procedures.

2.B. Transparency
The institution presents itself accurately and completely to students and the public with respect to its educational programs and any claims it makes related to the educational experience.

2.C. Board Governance
In discharging its fiduciary duties, the institution’s governing board is free from undue external influence and empowered to act in the best interests of the institution, including the students it serves.

2.D. Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression
The institution supports academic freedom and freedom of expression in the pursuit of knowledge as integral to high-quality teaching, learning and research.

2.E. Knowledge Acquisition, Discovery and Application
The institution adheres to policies and procedures that ensure responsible acquisition, discovery and application of knowledge.

The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness in fulfilling its mission. The rigor and quality of each educational program is consistent regardless of modality, location or other differentiating factors.

3.A. Educational Programs
The institution maintains learning goals and outcomes that reflect a level of rigor commensurate with college-level work, including by program level and the content of each of its educational programs.

3.B. Exercise of Intellectual Inquiry
The institution’s educational programs engage students in collecting, analyzing and communicating information; in practicing modes of intellectual inquiry or creative work; and in developing skills adaptable to changing environments.

3.C. Sufficiency of Faculty and Staff
The institution has the faculty and staff needed for effective, high-quality programs and student services.

3.D. Support for Student Learning and Resources for Teaching
The institution provides student support services that address the needs of its student populations, as well as the teaching resources and infrastructure necessary for student success.

3.E. Assessment of Student Learning
The institution improves the quality of educational programs based on its assessment of student learning.

3.F. Program Review
The institution improves its curriculum based on periodic program review.

3.G. Student Success Outcomes
The institution’s student success outcomes demonstrate continuous improvement, taking into account the student populations it serves and benchmarks that reference peer institutions.

The institution’s resources, structures, policies, procedures and planning enable it to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational programs, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

4.A. Effective Administrative Structures
The institution’s administrative structures are effective and facilitate collaborative processes such as shared governance; data-informed decision making; and engagement with internal and external constituencies as appropriate.

4.B. Resource Base and Sustainability
The institution’s financial and personnel resources effectively support its current operations. The institution’s financial management balances short-term needs with long-term commitments and ensures its ongoing sustainability.

4.C. Planning for Quality Improvement|
The institution engages in systematic strategic planning for quality improvement. It relies on data, integrating its insights from enrollment forecasts, financial capacity, student learning assessment, institutional operations and the external environment.

The institution’s resources, structures, processes and planning are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

1. Through its administrative structures and collaborative processes, the institution’s leadership demonstrates that it is effective and enables the institution to fulfill its mission.
2. The institution’s resource base supports its educational offerings and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.
3. The institution engages in systematic and integrated planning and improvement.

• What do you know about accreditation and have you seen or read the Assurance Argument?
• How would you describe OCU’s mission? Do you know where you would find the official statement?
• What are OCU’s greatest strengths?
• What are the biggest challenges facing OCU?
• How about challenges specific to your department?
• Do you know where to find information about academic integrity and policies regarding academic misconduct?
• Describe any campus processes that could be improved or made more efficient.
• What kind of changes are taking place at OCU? Do you see these as positive or not?
• How does your department contribute to OCU’s mission?
• How is morale on campus?
• Can you describe the rank and promotion process? What is your impression of the process?
• Talk about shared governance and how you participate in decision-making at different levels of the university (department, college, institution).
• How would you describe the relationship between faculty and administration? What works and what needs improvement?
• What resources are available to support faculty (e.g., library, internal or external grant support, faculty development, travel, etc.)? Are these sufficient in meeting faculty needs?
• Is your department actively involved in assessing student learning? How has your department used its assessment findings?
• How do you ensure that all classes – online, blended, off-campus, dual credit – have the same student learning outcomes and equivalent assessments?
• Are you involved in research? How does the university’s focus on research further OCU’s mission?
• How does OCU support students who are underprepared or struggling?
• What do you believe have been the major accomplishments of OCU over the last ten years?
• How does OCU support the community at large?
• For some common faculty issues (workload, salary, sabbatical leaves, etc.), what works well and what needs to be improved?
• Have OCU administrators established a culture of trust within the university?
• What is the process for making curriculum changes in your academic programs?
• Who is responsible for academic policy creation/modification?
• Are you familiar with the institutional learning outcomes?
• Does your department offer courses or programs via distance education? If so, how does your department ensure the quality of the curriculum?
• Does OCU provide sufficient technology support?
• Are facilities appropriately maintained at OCU?
• What challenges do you believe OCU will need to deal with in the next 10 years?
• Are the computer software systems helpful in assisting students with registration? With advising? With knowledge of campus events?

• How does your department support the mission of the university? How would you describe OCU’s mission?
• What do you know about the Higher Learning Commission?
• What is it like working at OCU? What are OCU’s greatest strengths?
• How is morale on campus?
• How about challenges specific to your department?
• What opportunities do you have for professional development? Are staff members treated equitably in their access to these opportunities?
• How are staff involved in campus decision-making processes? Do you think that staff have sufficient input into decisions that affect them?
• How would you describe the relationship between staff and administration? What works and what needs improvement?
• How are staff evaluated at OCU? What is your impression of the evaluation process?
• What kind of changes are taking place at OCU? Do you see these as positive or not?
• Describe any campus processes that could be improved or made more efficient.
• Do you understand the FERPA policy?
• Does OCU have academic and financial requirements which are presented clearly and completely to students and the public?
• Does OCU provide sufficient technology support?
• Are facilities appropriately maintained at OCU?
• How do departments across campuses work collaboratively? What works well and what could be improved?
• Do you feel that the work you do is valued by administration? Faculty? Other staff members? Students?
• What are the biggest resource challenges at OCU?
• What challenges do you believe OCU will need to deal with in the next 10 years?

While many academic agencies accredit particular programs of study (education, nursing, business, etc.), the Higher Learning Commission and other regional accrediting agencies are responsible for assuring that colleges and universities meet certain standards in terms of their missions, operations, and activities in teaching and student learning, discovery and promotion of knowledge, and service. Accreditation is an assurance to the public that an institution is properly prepared to do its job. On a more practical level, the HLC and the other accrediting agencies have been designated as the “gatekeepers” for federal funds in higher education, including student financial aid. Unaccredited schools are not eligible for many kinds of federal support. For more information, see the HLC website. In short, HLC ensures students are provided with a high-quality education.

An assurance argument is a periodic, rigorous, comprehensive review and analysis of an institution’s strengths and weaknesses. Its purposes are vital to both the institution’s external and internal constituencies. Accreditation is merit-based on an institution’s ability to meet the criteria and established standards.

The institution demonstrates that it meets the Criteria for Accreditation by preparing an Assurance Filing, comprised of an Assurance Argument and an Evidence File, using HLC’s Assurance System.

A team of peer reviewers evaluates the institution’s Assurance Filing. The outcome of this review is a recommendation as to whether the institution meets the Criteria for Accreditation. If the Assurance Review is part of a comprehensive evaluation, this review will also include an on-site visit by the peer review team. The Assurance Review conducted in Year 4 of the Open Pathway does not include an on-site visit unless the team determines one is necessary to explore uncertainties in evidence that cannot be resolved at a distance or if a sanction is being considered.

A decision-making body reviews the institution’s documentation and the recommendation from the peer review team and takes an official action.

Overall, accrediting agencies serve two purposes: one is to gauge the performance of an institution in relation to its overarching mission; the other is to promote improvement in the quality of the institution.

Within the two overarching purposes, the HLC will assess the institution’s educational processes and activities. The assessment process is further extended to the institution’s governance and administration; faculty teaching and professional development; financial stability; admissions; student services; institutional resources; continuous improvement; student learning and institutional effectiveness.

HLC has established five Criteria statements, as outlined below, each including its Core Components. An institution must present reasonable and representative evidence of meeting each Criterion.

The five criteria for accreditation that will be in effect when OCU comes up for re-accreditation in 2022 are:

1. Mission
2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support
4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
5. Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness

Components of these criteria and examples of evidence that support these components can be found on the HLC website. Additionally, HLC looks for the university showing continuous improvement.

The campus will prepare the Assurance Argument Report, based on the criteria, and submit it to the HLC in Spring 2022. An evaluation team from the HLC is scheduled to come to campus on March 28-29, 2022.

The last full accreditation visit from the Higher Learning Commission was in 2010. OSUIT undergoes regular monitoring and reviews based upon HLC’s Open Pathways 10-Year Cycle.

• An HLC Reaffirmation of Accreditation Steering Committee was formed
• Criterion Teams have been formed to collect evidence to support each criterion
• Members of the committee and selected staff and faculty were tasked to draft the Assurance Argument

These groups have worked together to help prepare the campus for the 2022 visit. For more information on how you can help the campus to prepare, please contact Dr. Paul Bowdre by email [email protected]. 

The campus will be visited by a Peer Review Team of trained Consultant Evaluators. These are administrators, staff, and faculty who have been accepted to the Peer Review Corps by the HLC. All will have gone through training for such visits and will be familiar with the evaluation Criteria. 

The team will already have received the complete campus Assurance Argument and will have had access to all supporting documents. During the visit, they will be seeking to validate the content of the argument in terms of the strengths we have declared and data that support them, as well as concerns that need attention or issues that may confront us in the future. Team members will have meetings with key individuals and groups from across the campus and will have open meetings that are less structured. The on-site activities will take place on March 28-29, 2022.

The HLC team will write an Assurance report that addresses the Criteria and Core Components for accreditation and send a draft to the campus a few weeks after the visit. The team will note the Components that have been met, any that have not been, and any qualifications or concerns regarding them. After receiving the draft, the President will have a chance to correct factual errors, and the final report will be submitted to the HLC no more than 5 weeks after the visit.

The team may simply recommend continued accreditation with no recommended follow-up activities before the next scheduled review in 2023-2024 or the next scheduled site visit in 2029-2030. If an institution is in serious trouble, the team could recommend probation or even withdrawal of accreditation. In between, there is a range of possible actions, including required progress reports on how the institution is dealing with particular issues, monitoring reports dealing with specific issues that require careful and ongoing attention, and contingency reports dealing with changes taking place that affect the mission or nature of the institution. HLC staff estimate that 85% of institutions will have some kind of activity required.

The institution will need to look carefully at the report, both for the validation of the things that we are doing well and for advice about ways in which we can improve what we are doing. Particular issues may be referred to appropriate committees and offices for examination and action. 

At that point, we continue our ongoing commitment to quality improvement as we look forward to the 4-year Assurance Review.  That is similar to the 10-year review, however, it does not include a site visit unless something was found that needed further attention as mentioned above.

As this is an opportunity for self-reflection, we hope, above all, that the visit will confirm that OSUIT is meeting its mission in meaningful ways. These are great opportunities for the institution to learn much more about ourselves. We also hope to receive good advice about ways in which we can better meet and advance our mission. In the end, it is about affirming, renewing, and furthering our commitment to Student Success, Employee Excellence, and Community Relevance; the cornerstones of what it means to be OSUIT.

Dr. Paul Bowdre, Assistant Provost for Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness