Overview of the Self-Study Process
As part of the Self-Study process, the college prepares an extensive written Self-Study Report. This report and the Commission’s Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation serve as the basis for an on-site evaluation by a team of peer evaluators. During Self-Study, the institution carefully considers its educational programs, policies and services, with particular attention to student learning and achievement, and it determines how well these programs and services accomplish the institution’s goals, fulfill its mission, and meet the Commission’s Standards. Under the leadership of a Steering Committee appointed by the institution, working groups or subcommittees examine existing data and evaluations, gather new information, and prepare analytical reports on their assigned topics. The Steering Committee edits the reports of the various working groups, produces a draft for discussion, and disseminates the final Self-study Report. A broad cross-section of the campus community is expected to participate in each component of the Self-Study process as part of the Steering Committee, the working groups, and campus-wide discussions. The Self-Study Report has two sets of audiences and two major purposes. The primary audience is the institution’s own community and the secondary audience includes external or public constituencies. The primary purpose of the Self-Study Report is to advance institutional self-understanding and self-improvement. The Self-Study Report, therefore, is most useful when it is analytical and forward-looking rather than descriptive or defensive, when it is used both to identify problems and to develop solutions to them, and when it identifies opportunities for growth and development
In the past, the Self-Study process and related site visit occurred on a ten year cycle, however MSCHE is now transitioning to an eight-year accreditation cycle.
The Peer Review Process
After appropriate institutional constituents have reviewed a draft of the Self-Study and revisions have been made, the institution submits a final Self-Study Report, including all required materials, to the Commission and Team Members for their review. The Commission will also share the institution’s peer-reviewed Compliance Report with the Team Chair. After the evaluation visit is completed, the Team Chair submits a Team Report to both the institution and the Commission. After reviewing the Team Report, the institution submits an Institutional Response. The Team Chair also submits a Confidential Brief to the Commission. The Confidential Brief contains a summary of findings, as well as a proposal for Commission action.
Commission Process
The Committee on Evaluation Reports meets and discusses the Self-Study, Team Report, Confidential Brief and Institutional Response with the Team Chair. After consideration of all materials, the Committee makes a proposal for Commission action. If the Committee’s proposal differs substantially from the proposal found in the Team Chair’s Confidential Brief, the institution will be contacted and invited to submit additional materials prior to the next Commission meeting. At that meeting, the Commission determines a final action and the institution is notified. For more information, please review Commission Procedures, Advance Notice of Noncompliance Recommendations.
