Campus Forum on
Institutional Accreditation
HLC Team
December 3, 2013
Agenda
 New Process for Accreditation from
HLC
 Assurance Argument
 Evidence File
 Quality Initiative
 Next Steps
 What Campus Community Can Do
New Process, New Criteria
Criterion 1: Mission
Criterion 2: Integrity: Ethical and Responsible
Conduct
Criterion 3: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources,
and Support
Criterion 4: Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and
Improvement
Criterion 5: Resources, Planning, and Institutional
Effectiveness
How the New Criteria Work
Criterion
Criterion 2: Integrity
Core Component
2.E. The institution ensures that faculty,
students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply
knowledge responsibly.
Sub-Components
 1. The institution provides effective oversight and
support services to ensure the integrity of
research and scholarly practice conducted by its
faculty, staff, and students.
 2. Students are offered guidance in the ethical
use of information resources.
 3. The institution has and enforces policies on
academic honesty and integrity.
How to Find Out More
 HLC Web Site: www.ncahlc.org
 HLC Criteria:
http://www.ncahlc.org/Information-forInstitutions/criteria-and-corecomponents.html
 UIS Accreditation Web Site:
www.uis.edu/accreditation
Continuous Improvement
 No longer a “self-study”
 No longer a gearing up process 2 years
before the site visit
 Now – continual updating of evidence
and analysis through a web-based
system
Pathways to Accreditation
 Open Pathway vs. Standard Pathway
 Open Pathway
– For stable institutions
– For institutions that have not undergone
major changes
– For institutions in good standing with the
HLC
– For institutions seeking improvement
Obligations of Open Pathway
 10-year Cycle
– Mini-review in year 4 (electronic
submission; no site visit)
– Major review with site visit in year 10
– Project (Quality Initiative) in years 5-9 of
each 10-year cycle
Open Pathway Elements
 Assurance Argument
 Evidence File
 Quality Initiative
Assurance Argument
 Word limit – 35,000 (half the size of our
2007 report)
 Strictly organized by Criteria and Core
Components
 Specific clear examples and analysis
Evidence File
 No longer a physical resource room
 Very limited links to our campus web
sites (e.g., catalog, schedule, personnel
policies)
 PDF documents – even web sites!
 Good, relevant pieces of information
Campus Participation
 HLC Team needs
– Specific, relevant examples of good
practices related to the HLC Criteria for the
Assurance Argument
– Documentation of good practices for the
Evidence File
• Formal documents
• Informal descriptions or examples
Questionnaires – Spring 2014
 Unit Questionnaire
 Academic Departments and Programs
Questionnaire
 Employee Questionnaire
To be released after the January 29
Campus Forum
HLC Team Subcommittees
 Governance and Diversity - Villegas
 Academic Programs and Student Support
– M. Thibodeaux-Thompson
 Planning, Operations, and Management of
Resources - Shures
 Outreach and Scholarship - Wrighton
 Integrity and Assessment - McCaughan
Quality Initiative
 Takes place between Years 5 and 9 of the 10year cycle
 Timeline for UIS: Fall 2013 to Spring 2017
(shortened timeline with transition)
 A for Effort – we have to try
 Focus for QI – Assessment of GE, especially
ECCE
 HLC Assessment Academy
Why This Quality Initiative?
 2007 Site Team Report: multiple references to our
new GE curriculum, to our “plans and efforts to
improve assessment of general education,” and to
our institutional mission of civic engagement
 Interest from campus governance (GECo, CASL, &
UGC)
 Cuts across many departments, including graduate
departments
 Cuts across Student Affairs and Academic Affairs
HLC Assessment Academy
 Provides targeted support for our project:
Workshops, training, and consultants
 Roundtable in October: very positive feedback
on proposal
 Focus on faculty participation in scholarship of
teaching and learning
 QI Organizers: Pardie, Moranski, Cornell,
Burton, Bapat, Villegas, Wrighton, Wassenberg
Next Steps
 Questionnaires – Spring 2014
 Subcommittee work on Evidence File
and Assurance Argument
 Discussions about QI with governance
committees and faculty
 Development of Web Site
 Youtube videos
How You Can Help?
 Immediate Future:
– Make note best practices, on-going processes,
special projects
– Respond to spring questionnaires and Subcommittee
requests for information
– Visit the web site: www.uis.edu/accreditation
– Learn about the Criteria
– Keep informed and email us with ideas or thoughts to
accreditation@uis.edu
How Can You Help?
 Plan ahead
– Focus on projects about student learning
– Make program review, unit assessment
reports, and CASL reports meaningful
– Document your processes and special
projects
– Talk with students and encourage their
participation in institutional surveys (NSSE,
SSI, alumni surveys)