The Self-Study Process in Accreditation

The Higher Learning Commission builds its comprehensive evaluations for initial and continued candidacy and for initial and continued accreditation on two major processes: institutional self-study and peer evaluation. An institution scheduled for accreditation review has the prerogative to plan and conduct the self-study process in a way that leads to its preferred continuous improvement yet still provides evidence to the Commission that it fulfills the Criteria for Accreditation. The organization summarizes its findings in a self-study report, which constitutes formal application for the Commission action desired and serves as the frame of reference for the review that the evaluation team conducts.

While acknowledging the institution’s freedom to create its own self-study design, the Commission believes that certain attributes are essential to a successful self-study process. An effective self-study process

Fits the distinctive nature of the organization
Achieves stated goals that guide the design and the conduct of the process
Ensures effective evaluation of the whole institution
Promises to have an impact on the institution beyond the Commission visit
Engages multiple constituencies of the institution
Builds naturally on existing and ongoing self-evaluation processes
Has strong presidential and board support
Draws on the expertise and credibility of recognized leaders throughout the institution
Maintains regular and effective communication links with institutional constituencies
Produces evidence to show that the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation are met
Produces a self-study report that meets the Commission’s needs
Testifies to the institution’s commitment to peer review

More information about this process is available in Chapter 5 of the Handbook of Accreditation.

Practical Advice for Creating and Conducting an Effective Self-Study Process

At each Annual Meeting over the past decade, experienced self-study coordinators have served as mentors to those just beginning the self-study process. They have provided excellent practical advice in their meeting presentations and in the papers they wrote for the Collection of Papers on Self-Study and Institutional Improvement.

Make Good Preparations

An effective self-study process builds on the context of the institution and its ongoing planning. The institution’s leadership needs to attend to the following tasks before turning the self-study process over to the steering committee.

Create the stated institutional goals or outcomes for the process; if there are expected priorities for institutional issues, make them clear.
Identify anticipated changes or improvements that need to be integrated into the self-study process or the self-study report.
Make explicit the organization’s values and culture that the self-study process must honor.
Propose the linkages between the self-study process and ongoing planning endeavors.
Understand the U.S. Department of Education compliance components of the Commission's accrediting activities.
Consult with the Commission to determine how the self-study process can be used to meet the objectives of the institution’s leadership.

The leadership should be thoughtful in positioning the steering committee. The leadership may wish to determine the size of the committee in relation to tasks that only the members of the committee can achieve and use a smaller, more efficient committee charged with creating and working with multiple subcommittees or working groups.

The Commission has a number of models for crafting a self-study design. See Chapter 5 in the Handbook of Accreditation for more information.

Every process needs to ensure that the institution can provide evidence that it fulfills the Criteria for Accreditation. The institution’s leadership and the steering committee must agree on

Established timelines that fit the time available before the team visit
The tasks to be done
The expected outcomes of the process
The budget for the process

Involve the Right People in the Process

The leadership of the institution makes a very critical strategic decision in naming the steering committee and the self-study coordinator(s). The steering committee should include people who are

Experienced with accreditation, including, if possible, individuals who did it a decade earlier
Able to focus on the institution, mitigating against silo-thinking
Recognized for their credibility within the institution
Highly visible and influential within the institution

Establish and Use Effective Structures, Processes, and Techniques

As the steering committee and coordinators plan for the process ahead of them, they would be well-served by

Creating structures or processes that involve a broad range of constituencies. These are often subcommittees or small working groups with specific tasks or projects.
Using technology for data collection, communication, and networking.
Establishing effective coordination of all processes within the larger self-study process.
Providing effective data management.
Overseeing effective use of the budget for the self-study process.
Creating a process check system.
Including ways to have fun. This is repeated by experienced coordinators and should not be ignored.

Plan for Writing the Report

In collaboration with the institution’s leadership, the steering committee should define the multiple audiences for the report. While it is obvious that one audience is The Higher Learning Commission (the evaluation team and the participants in subsequent review processes), the institution may also have internal and external uses for the report.

Early in the planning process, the steering committee needs to determine how it will create the self-study report. It is increasingly important for an effective self-study process to culminate in a document that speaks on behalf of the total institution. As the steering committee plans its strategy for creating the report, it should

Choose one or more writers/editors and clearly define their responsibilities
Weigh how direct the linkages must be between working papers generated through the process and the self-study report
Create a time frame for writing, and create strategies for review and revision
Develop the strategy for providing data in the report

Each Annual Meeting includes a large number of self-study reports for review, and each organization represented by a self-study report has indicated a willingness to make a copy available at cost.

The Self-Study Design

It is importance to write a self-study design very early in the process. This should address

The self-study calendar and timetable
The institution’s goals for the self-study process
The fit between the self-study process and the self-study report, and how they will meet both the Commission’s and the institution’s needs
The proposed structure of committees or work groups and who will serve on them
A working outline that may become the table of contents of the self-study report

Although the Commission does not require the submission of every self-study design for review and approval, most self-study coordinators share the document with their Commission staff liaison, who reviews the design and provides comment and advice.

Use Commission Support

The Commission offers guidance in a number of venues.

Attend a self-study workshop at the Annual Meeting.
Work with the Commission’s staff liaison scheduling a campus visit.
Seek help in networking with Commission members at the Annual Meeting.
Use materials such as the Handbook for Accreditation and the Collection of Papers.