Bluffton University is in the process of establishing reaccreditation from the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), a process completed every 10 years to continue operating as an accredited degree-granting institution. As one of the final steps, a team of HLC reviewers visited campus Nov. 12 and 13 to formulate a recommendation for or against Bluffton’s reaccreditation. Interim Vice President and Dean of Academic Affairs Lamar Nisly said he expects a decision to be announced around February.
Dr. Lamar Nisly, Interim Vice President and Dean of Academic Affairs, Photo by Colten McCabe
HLC and the importance of accreditation
As one of six regional accreditation agencies, the HLC is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as the accrediting body for colleges and universities in 19 states in the North Central region. Bluffton University has maintained accreditation from the HLC since March 27, 1953. Bluffton also holds accreditation specifically related to specialized academic programs, including dietetics and education.
“Regional accreditation is the highest level of accreditation you can get,” said Nisly. “It’s essentially an official statement saying, ‘This is a legitimate program, and we are certifying that they are doing legitimate educational work, and their degrees should be taken seriously.’”
Criteria for accreditation
In order to merit accreditation, each institution must be able to prove they meet five specific criteria, or standards of quality determined by HLC. The first criterion involves having a mission that is broadly understood and publicly articulated. According to the HLC website, it must also “guide the operations” and demonstrate a connection to the “diversity of society” and a commitment to the “public good.”
The second criterion emphasizes integrity in terms of ethical and responsible conduct. This criterion addresses the functions of the governing board, administration, faculty and staff. It also requires institutional transparency regarding its own programs, tuition costs and accreditation status, as well as a commitment to truth and academic honesty in the classroom.
Criteria 3 and 4 revolve around an institution’s teaching and learning environment, including its quality, resources, support, evaluation and improvement. Programs, curriculum and faculty instruction appropriate to higher education are stressed. Criterion 4 specifically establishes a demonstrated “responsibility for the quality of educational programs, learning environments and support services,” and regular evaluation of its “effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement,” according to the HLC website.
The fifth criterion asks the institution to explain its processes regarding resources, planning and institutional effectiveness. To meet this criterion, institutions must demonstrate the ability to financially support and improve academic programs, to maintain effective administrative leadership and to integrate strategic planning for systematic improvement.
The reaccreditation process
Nisly said the accreditation process has undergone some changes over the past several decades. The process of maintaining accreditation is now an ongoing sequence of filing Institutional Updates, Assurance Reviews and Quality Initiatives leading up to a Comprehensive Evaluation.
Every 10 years, Bluffton is required to undergo a Comprehensive Evaluation that results in a decision regarding its accreditation status. The Comprehensive Evaluation includes the submission of an Assurance Argument and a Federal Compliance Filing, a student opinion survey and an on-campus visit from a team of peer reviewers.
Nisly said the Assurance Argument is a 35,000-word document, supplemented by an evidence file of links to documents such as syllabi and data tables, that addresses how Bluffton adheres to each of the five criteria for accreditation. While meeting regularly over the past two years with a team of a faculty, staff and administrators, Nisly compiled the document for submission to the HLC. It was officially finalized at the beginning of October.
The reviewers’ recent visit was the next step in the Comprehensive Evaluation. In advance, the team read the Assurance Argument and decided what additional information was needed and who to meet with while on-site. They then spent two days conducting meetings, interviews and public forum discussions.
Nisly said the visit from peer reviewers is a way of asking, “We’ve seen your document, now what does it really mean on your campus?”
The peer evaluators were volunteers from faith-based, liberal arts institutions similar in size to Bluffton University, coming from Saint John’s University in Collegeville, Minn., Olivet College in Olivet, Mich., Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia, Ark. and Evangel University in Springfield, Mo.
On Monday, Nov. 12, open forum discussions were held in the Kreider Room in Marbeck Center. These sessions provided a chance for the HLC peer reviewers to interact with faculty, staff and students focused on a specific criterion for accreditation.
In these forums, the peer reviewers were given the chance to ask those in attendance if they could identify the university’s strategic goals or list ways teaching and learning are supported on campus. In response, students, faculty and staff were able to share their stories and experiences in regard to a specific accreditation criterion.
Following the HLC’s on-campus visit, the peer reviewers will compile their findings into an evaluation of whether the institution has sufficiently met the Criteria for Accreditation and make a recommendation regarding continued accreditation to the HLC’s Institutional Actions Council. Nisly said Bluffton anticipates receiving official information on the evaluation and recommendation by February.
Reaccreditation in the midst of transition
This Comprehensive Evaluation fell in the midst of several notable changes on campus – the presidential transition and a revision to the general education curriculum.
“In a general way, I would say accreditors like to see that you’re making changes–that you’re not just sort of stuck in one place,” said Nisly. “I think the fact that we do have a new president who is bringing in lots of ideas and ways to move forward helps to show that we are taking seriously questions about future planning.”
