Higher Learning Commission
HLC Home

Self-Study Report

Site Visit Team

Site Visit Schedule

Peer Reviewer Profile

Focus Group Materials

Newsletters

Progress Reports

Share Your Views

Committees

Criteria and Core Components

Timelines

FAQ's

Examples From Other Institutions

Higher Learning Commission

Data Collection

University Surveys

Video Competition

Third-Party Comments

Board of Trustees Executive Summary

Resolution for HLC Re-Accreditation (July 2008)

Ferris State University, including Kendall College of Art and Design, is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, a regional accreditor. The HLC accredits all institutions of higher learning in a 19-state region that spans from Arizona in the west to West Virginia in the east, and North Dakota in the north. The University’s last comprehensive visit in 2000-01 resulted in a 10-year renewal of accreditation, with a follow-up report on the merger with Kendall and general education there. The next review of the University’s status will occur during the 2010-11 academic year, likely during the spring semester.

Accreditation is critically important to Ferris State University. The three primary reasons are that 1) federal financial aid is contingent upon the University’s being accredited, and about 80% of our students access this aid; 2) credits from accredited institutions are transferable, while those from unaccredited institutions generally are not; and, 3) students are reluctant (appropriately) to enroll at an unaccredited institution.

Because the self-study process must be comprehensive, inclusive, introspective, critical, and valuable, a considerable amount of time should be allowed, since it is often difficult to fully engage some stakeholder groups (such as students and faculty) during particular times of the year, such as summer.

A steering committee has been appointed (roster will be provided) and initial planning meetings have already been held. During the spring semester, the Criterion Committees convened at least once, the steering committee met several times, and several steering committee members attended the April annual meeting of the Higher Learning Commission in Chicago. The greatest amount of work (surveys, focus groups, meetings, data analysis, etc.) will occur during the 2008-09 and 2009-10 academic years. Getting an early start on the process will enable us to align our data management systems with our reporting and evidence requirements.

It is customary for the University’s Board of Trustees to take official action authorizing the University administration to pursue reaccreditation. Additionally, it is expected that the Board will take an active interest in the process and be apprised of the findings of the campus self-study. The Board will be invited (and expected) to meet with the visiting team to discuss your governance role, your understanding of the University’s strengths and challenges, the achievement of the institutional mission, finances, and more. The Board’s role at the time of the visit, as well as at other times, is a critical one.

The criteria for accreditation, each component of which we must demonstrate with substantive evidence in order to be reaccredited, follows:

CRITERION ONE: MISSION AND INTEGRITY

The organization operates with integrity to ensure the fulfillment of its mission through structures and processes that involve the board, administration, faculty, staff, and students.

Core Component A.  The organization’s mission documents are clear and articulate publicly the organization’s commitments.

Core Component B.  In its mission documents, the organization recognizes the diversity of its learners, other relevant constituencies, and the greater society it serves.

Core Component C.  Understanding of and support for the mission pervade the organization.

Core Component D.  The organization’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the organization to fulfill its mission.

Core Component E.  The organization upholds and protects its integrity.

CRITERION TWO: PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE

The organization’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its education, and respond to future challenges and opportunities.

Core Component A.  The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic trends.

Core Component B.  The organization’s resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

Core Component C.  The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement.

Core Component D.  All levels of planning align with the organization’s mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.

CRITERION THREE: STUDENT LEARNING AND EFFECTIVE TEACHING

The organization provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission.

Core Component A.  The organization’s goals for student learning outcomes are clearly stated for each educational program and make effective assessment possible.

Core Component B.  The organization values and supports effective teaching.

Core Component C.  The organization creates effective learning environments.

Core Component D.  The organization’s learning resources support student learning and effective teaching.

CRITERION FOUR:  ACQUISITION, DISCOVERY, AND APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE

The organization promotes a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff, and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice, and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission.

Core Component A.  The organization demonstrates, through the actions of its board, administrators, students, faculty, and staff, that it values a life of learning.

Core Component B.  The organization demonstrates that acquisition of a breadth of knowledge and skills and the exercise of intellectual inquiry are integral to its educational programs.

Core Component C.  The organization assesses the usefulness of its curricula to students who will live and work in a global, diverse, and technological society.

Core Component D.  The organization provides support to ensure that faculty, students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.

CRITERION FIVE: ENGAGEMENT AND SERVICE

As called for by its mission, the organization identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways both value.

Core Component A.  The organization learns from the constituencies it serves and analyzes its capacity to serve their needs and expectations.

Core Component B.  The organization has the capacity and the commitment to engage with its identified constituencies and communities.

Core Component C.  The organization demonstrates its responsiveness to those constituencies that depend on it for service.

Core Component D.  Internal and external constituencies value the services the organization provides.

Accreditation has gained a lot of national attention with recent national reports and legislative actions. It is possible that some changes will emerge in the expectations for documentation of key areas of interest, such as the value added by institutions.

The Administration and the Steering Committee will plan to keep the Board apprised of its progress in each of the next three years.

FSU Home Academic Affairs Back Search