Middle States Self-Study Guide
Final Self-Study Report Submitted
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education Self-Study Steering Committee is thrilled to announce that we have submitted our final self-study report and all supporting evidence to the Commission! The Steering Committee sincerely thanks everyone involved in this important process for their efforts and dedication over the last two years.
The Steering Committee also invites you to read some of the evidence submitted to MSCHE to support our self-study. These documents are crucial to telling our story and are affirmations of the culture of improvement at 私房俱乐部. You may also view the Evidence Inventory on our
Next steps in our reaccreditation process will be announced in the coming weeks.听
Self-Study Timeline
October 2019: Self-Study Institute
March 1, 2020: SSD Draft Due
June 15, 2020: Final SSD Due
September 1, 2021: Self-Study Report Sent to Team Chair
October 2020: Self-Study Prep Visit with MSCHE Liaison
October 2021: Team Chair Preliminary Visit
February 18, 2022: Final Document Upload
April 2022: Self-Study Evaluation Team Visit
April 2022: Team Report
May 2022: Institutional Response
May 31, 2022: Review Closes
November 2022: MSCHE Commission Action
May 22, 2020 Update: The final draft of our Self-Study Design is now available for public consumption. Please contact the Steering Committee with any questions or feedback you may have on this document.
September 30, 2021 Update: The draft of our Self-Study is now available for public consumption.
The self-study process is, technically, a comprehensive review of the university that happens with the regional accrediting body. Every institution in the country who awards federal financial aid dollars must be regionally accredited and participate in the designated self-study processes.
私房俱乐部 is in the region of the United States that is overseen by the Middle States Commission for Higher Education (MSCHE). In MSCHE鈥檚 processes, the self-study happens every eight years and is designed to be a systematic, guided review of the entire institution.
Yes! 私房俱乐部 has been accredited by MSCHE since 1931. However, it is important to know that MSCHE has gone through a set of substantive changes since we last participated in the process. The Standards of Accreditation are new, as are many of the policies and the self-study process. For those of you who have participated in MSCHE self-studies before, we鈥檇 ask you to be aware of the many changes to the process. In particular, you鈥檒l find that there are now clear guidelines and structures in place for how the self-study process must happen.
According to MSCHE, the self-study process should be an honest appraisal of the state of the institution. The document itself should be entirely evidence-driven and consistently demonstrate the use of assessment. While the self-study is a good place to share institutional accomplishments and highlight outcomes, it is also important to discuss areas for ongoing innovation and improvement.
In addition, MSCHE expects that the entire Self-Study process is a university-wide initiative. Everyone across campus, whether staff, faculty, or student, should know that the process is happening, be aware of the basics of the process, and have opportunities to participate.
Yes. More than ever before, MSCHE is being very clear about what they define 鈥渆vidence鈥 to include and how it should be presented. In fact, the new Self-Study process is centered around something called the Evidence Inventory. Gone are the days of filling rooms with random paperwork 鈥 the Evidence Inventory is a cataloged and referenced inventory of documents, processes, and procedures. The Evidence Inventory serves four primary functions: to document compliance with the standards; to support assertions made in the self-study report; to add consistency and coherence to the final document; and to develop a long-term resources that the university should continuously update to document ongoing compliance.
MSCHE states that all evidence must be: organized, analytical, concise, and fair and honest.
Interim Reports
Use the buttons below to read the third interim report from each working group.
Third
Second
Self-Study Work Groups
Work Groups in the new are assigned based on the university鈥檚 chosen Self-Study approach. 私房俱乐部 has chosen the Standards-Based Approach. In this approach, the Self-Study is organized around MSCHE鈥檚 seven standards for accreditation. As such, we have created a Work Group for each individual standard as well as an additional Work Group to focus on compliance. 听
Work Groups serve as one pillar in the foundation of a good Self-Study process. Work Groups are responsible for gathering evidence of current practices and framing how the final Self-Study document will ultimately be organized. The activity level of each Work Group is likely to vary over the course of the Self-Study process, but the majority of the work will be concentrated in the 2020 calendar year.
One important point is that Work Groups are not tasked with creating new mechanisms for assessment 鈥 rather, their goal is to gather evidence that already exists and identify gaps in what we already do. The mantra, if you will, that MSCHE suggests for Work Groups to take on is: 听Do we have it? 听Do we use it? Does it work?
In general, the jobs of the Work Group are to:
- Promote the self-study process across campus
- Gather evidence to show how we meet the criteria for their assigned standard
- Identify any gaps in evidence
- Provide interim reports to the Steering Committee
- Provide a final report to the Steering Committee to address their standard
When writing the interim and final reports, the Work Groups should remember that they will be asked to focus on addressing the standards and institutional priorities. 听In doing so, it is important that the Work Group uses data to demonstrate institutional performance. That data should be presented in a way that makes clear any assumptions and demonstrates that the data are interpreted appropriately (including a discussion of the statistics or other analysis methods). Finally, it is important to use the analysis to show opportunities for innovation and improvement.
Also new to the Self-Study process is the existence of a team of Writers who will ultimately be responsible for taking the information compiled by the Work Groups and turning into a concise and coherent single document. It is not the job of the Work Groups to write the document itself. Rather, it can be helpful to think of this process as creating a sort-of annotated bibliography of what assessments exist, how they are tied to the standards, what the assessments tell us, and how they have been used to make decisions.
MSCHE says that, 鈥渨hat is most important is that (1) working group members represent a broad range of constituencies at the institution, (2) the working groups have designated leaders to keep them on task and on schedule, (3) the working groups understand their charge and abide by it, and (4) the steering committee and working groups established a mechanism for accountability and effective communication between them.鈥 私房俱乐部 has worked to achieve these four key points in a number of ways. 听First, the Work Groups were designed to be broadly representative of stakeholders from across campus. 听Second, each Work Group has a Chair as well as a Steering Committee liaison to guide them through the process; this will also help us with the third goal of keeping the groups on task and following their charge. 听Finally, we鈥檝e put into place a Microsoft Teams environment for facilitating communication and sharing information and documents, both among the Work Group members as well as with the Steering Committee.
Self-Study Steering Committee Members
Dr. Joanne Hosey-McGurk, Chair, Assistant Professor of English
Dr. Carrie Allen, Assessment Coordinator
Dr. Dyan Jones, Associate Provost for Institutional Effectiveness and Associate Professor of Physics
Ms. Lucy Belleau '22, 私房俱乐部 Student Government President
Mr. David Myron, Vice President of Finance and Administration
Dr. Laura Zirkle, Vice President for Student Life
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?)
- Do we use it? (Can you show that this is a regular and useful practice?)
- Does it work? (Can you show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
听 - Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?)
- Do we use it? (Can you show that this is a regular and useful practice?)
- Does it work? (Can you show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
听 - Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
听 - Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?)
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?)
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
听 - Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?)
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?)
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
听 - Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?);
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?);
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
- Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
听 - Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?);
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?);
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
- Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?);
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?);
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
- Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
- Identify all existing evidence鈥攖hat is, documents, processes, data, and results鈥攖o support each of the criterion of the Standard
- Identify any gaps in the evidence鈥攖hat is, where a criterion is under- or un-supported
- Describe what each piece of evidence is used for
- Analyze the collection of evidence in relation to the criteria to determine:
- Do we have it? (Is the evidence for the criterion sufficient?);
- Do we use it? (Can we show that this is a regular and useful practice?);
- Does it work? (Can we show how we use the evidence in our efforts toward innovation and continuous improvement?)
- Submit reports following stated guidelines that match evidence to criteria
- Holding regular meetings
- Posting meeting minutes on Teams and completing the Work Group Meeting Attendance Form
- Submitting interim reports on time
Working Group I is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the university鈥檚 mission. Its focus is on MSCHE Standard I, as well as the Requirements of Affiliation that are related to mission. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
听
Standard I Work Group Members
Dr. Greg Baker, Chair, Vice President for Mission Integration
Dr. Chris Magoc, Professor of History听
Dr. Sister Lisa Mary McCartney RSM '71, Mission Associate
Ms. Jenell Patton, Assistant Director of Campus Ministry
Ms. Janiece Withers '22, 私房俱乐部 Student Government
Ms. Eileen Zinchiak '80, Administrative Assistant, Hafenmaier College
Working Group II is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the ethics and integrity with which the university conducts itself and performs all its operations. Its focus is on MSCHE Standard II, as well as the Requirements of Affiliation that are related to ethics and integrity in operations. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Standard II Work Group Members
Dr. Jim Snyder, Chair, Associate Professor of Philosophy
Ms. Hannah Buncher 鈥21, 私房俱乐部 Student Government
Ms. Sara Dorich, Human Resources Coordinator
Dr. Richard McCarty, Associate Professor of Religious Studies
Ms. Suzanne Sweeney '88, Assistant Athletic Director for Student Health and Wellness
Ms. Bethany Woods '11 '19M, Assistant Director of Community Engagement
Working Group III is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of how educational opportunities are provided to students in all contexts across the institution. Its focus is on , as well as the that are related to learning experiences and expectations. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Standard III Work Group Members
Dr. Verna Ehret, Chair, Associate Professor of Religious Studies听
Dr. Maria Garase '98M, Associate Professor of Criminal Justice
Ms. Janice Haas '02 '06M, Director, Physical Therapist Assistant Program and Assistant Professor of Physical Therapy
Mr. Colin Hurley '13M, Director of Community Engagement
Ms. Lori Krause, Director of Academic Engagement
Ms. Gillian Mazur '22, 私房俱乐部 Student Government
Ms. Katie Ishler '03 '06M, Instructional Designer
Working Group IV is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the quality and effectiveness of the services that support and enhance the student learning experience. Its focus is on MSCHE Standard IV, as well as the Requirements of Affiliation that are related to the student services that support the learning experience. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
听
Standard IV Work Group Members
Ms. Sarah Allen, Chair, Executive Director for Campus Involvement
Ms. Andrea Barnett, Associate Provost for Academic Services and Support
Mr. Bradley Davis, Director of Athletics
Ms. Stacey Gadette, Head Coach, Women's Field Hockey
Dr. Joseph Morris, Chair, Political Science Department and Associate Professor of Political Science
Ms. Michelle Simpson '10 '17M, Director of Student Life
Dr. Judy Smith, Executive Director of Wellness
Ms. Dionne Veitch '92, Executive Director of Marketing/Brand Management
Ms. Michele Wheaton '01 '06M, Registrar
Working Group V is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the quality and scope of the university鈥檚 assessment activities. Its focus is on , as well as the that are related to university assessment. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Standard V Work Group Members
Dr. Amy Burniston '12M, Chair, Assistant Professor of Biology
Mr. Nick Broadfuhrer '22, 私房俱乐部 Student Government
Dr. Katie Duda, Assistant Professor of Russian Studies
Mr. Randall Rinke '88, Associate Dean, Walker College of Business and Assistant Professor of Business
Dr. Justin Ross, Director of Writing Center, Honors, and Prestigious Awards
Dr. Judy Stanley, Chair, Department of Nursing and Associate Professor of Nursing (RN-BSN)
Working Group VI is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the quality and sufficiency of the university鈥檚 processes of planning and resource allocation as they support innovation and continuous improvement. Its focus is on , as well as the that are related to planning and resources. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Standard VI Work Group Members
Ms. Jane Kelsey, Chair, Assistant Vice President for Finance and Treasurer
Ms. Jamie Breneman '05M, Director of Human Resources
Ms. Joan Giannelli, Staff Accountant, Finance
Mr. Ryan Palm '07, Associate Vice President for Advancement and Director of Development
Ms. Nicole Soltis, Assistant Director of Student Financial Services/Billing
Dr. Gary Sullivan, Assistant Professor of Risk Management
Dr. Robert von Thaden, Jr., Chair, Department of Religious Studies and Professor of Religious Studies
Working Group VII is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the degree to which the university is governed and administered in a manner that allows us to realize our stated mission and goals in a way that effectively benefits the institution, our students, and the other constituencies we serve. Its focus is on , as well as the that are related to governance. Specifically, you are entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Standard VII Work Group Members
Ms. Lindsay Frank '12 '14M, Co-chair, Director of Alumni Engagement
Dr. Gerry Tobin, Co-chair, Associate Professor of Psychology
Ms. Sarah Klein, 鈥22, 私房俱乐部 Student Government Vice President
Ms. Jeanette Britt '94 '99M, Vice President and Chief Information Officer
Ms. Kari Dundore-Shrout, Director, 私房俱乐部 North East Biology Department and Assistant Professor of Biology
Dr. Alice Edwards, Professor of Spanish
Mr. Travis Lindahl, Director of Graduate and Adult Enrollment
The Compliance work group is charged with conducting a thorough investigation of the degree to which the university complies with federal regulations required of an accredited institution. Its focus is on the , as well as the Requirements of Affiliation that are related to compliance. Specifically, it is entrusted to:
Working Group actions will include:
Compliance Work Group Members
Ms. Alice Agnew, Co-chair, COVID Case Worker
Ms. Amy Danzer, Co-chair, Accreditation Coordinator
Mr. Donald Fuhrmann '87, Chief of Police/Director of Public Safety
Ms. Carrie Newman, Director of Student Financial Services
Dr. John Parente, Associate Professor of Sports Business
Ms. Sheila Richter '77, Director of Institutional Research
Carrie Allen
Assessment Coordinator
Office: Preston 123