91探花

HLC Evidence Collection covers a broader range of topics than in the Assessment Clearinghouse. Assessment is a big part of the evidence that we use to tell our story to accreditors, and the Assessment Clearinghouse is a substantial database of academic and non-academic measures, but there are lots of other sources of evidence, like market research, stakeholder feedback, impact studies, planning documents (strategic, capital and financial), and more.

The assessment and evaluation work that each department and educational program completes annually plays a big part in demonstrating that we offer a quality education. Iterative years of these assessments can also show how we operate when a change is needed 鈥� how we identify a problem, plan a solution, gather resources for that plan, implement the change and monitor the results of the planned improvement.

The HLC Evidence Committees (also called Institutional Accreditation Committees) oversee the processes of identifying, collecting, and evaluating the evidence (data, information, policies, etc.) that we use to tell our story. The university is large, and we need representatives from across the university to help in the work. These committees are collecting the evidence and background information that we need in order to tell OHIO鈥檚 story to the peer reviewers and the public. Just like a research article, these evidence pieces are pulled together to demonstrate our thesis: that we are in compliance with federal regulations and accreditor expectations.

The first year of these committees (2022-23) has been quite a learning process, both for the committee members and for the departments, offices and colleges that were asked to submit evidence. That鈥檚 because we were collecting several years鈥� worth of evidence for different processes, data and policies. In future years, we will only need to collect a particular set of updated data plus evidence related to new strategies or processes. 

There are three reasons we don鈥檛 use websites. 1) The HLC system will not allow websites, except for very specific things (e.g., faculty handbook and course offerings).  2) Website content or even web addresses may change between the time of evidence collection and the time of HLC鈥檚 review. What seems like great clear evidence now could be gone by Spring 2025. Instead, we need to have a snapshot of how you present the information now.  3) Websites can be very long and complex, and reviewers don鈥檛 want to scroll all day. If we have a pdf of the website, we can highlight the relevant part and make the reviewer鈥檚 job easier.

The process will get easier in future years due to familiarity and because the evidence collection process will be refined. It鈥檚 always a little rough when you first begin in earnest.

Departments and offices can do a few things to make it easier to tell the story of 91探花, how we provide a great education, and how we constantly work to improve:

• In minutes or documents, include the rationale for a decision that you are making. It鈥檚 helpful to include who was involved in a decision, what data or information was considered and what was decided.
• When new information comes out (survey data, enrollment or employment trends, student success metrics like retention and graduation rates, etc.), share it across your department/unit and discuss and document relevant findings.
• Use any existing annual reports to record your decisions AND to review progress on what you decided to implement the prior year.

We advise to remove student names when possible from any document submitted for evidence review. As evidence committee members and employees of 91探花, we are obligated to follow FERPA guidelines on public vs. confidential student information. During the initial review of the evidence done internally by employees only, we can see documents with student names as it falls into the FERPA exception of school officials with a legitimate educational interest. Student names and other student identifiers will be removed from the evidence that we upload and share with HLC.

Institutional accreditation is a public way of demonstrating the quality of education that OHIO provides, along with showing our adherence to federal regulations. Accreditation shows the public that the university is acting in good faith to serve the public by providing a quality education.

Only accredited institutions are eligible to receive federal funds for higher education, including student financial aid and research funding. Accreditation helps to ensure that a student鈥檚 transfer credits will be accepted by another accredited school. Some graduate schools or programs only accept students with degrees from accredited schools.

91探花 was first accredited by the Higher Learning Commission in 1913. Since then, the university has participated in review and reaffirmation activities many times. Most recently, 91探花 was reaffirmed in 2015-2016.

Institutional accreditation happens in cycles, so that we can continue to show our higher quality. Public interest in the value of higher education has been growing over the past several years. Our potential students and their families, along with government officials and politicians, want to know that the money spent by students and taxpayers is a good investment. Employers want to know that the graduates that they hire have had a quality education. Since our original accreditation in 1913, the university, society, the job market, and taxpayer funding models have all changed significantly. Reaffirming that we still meet the criteria for accreditation shows a continued focus on educational quality.

Institutional accreditation reflects the overall quality of the whole institution without making judgments about any specific programs. Institutional accreditation is accreditation of all programs, sites, and methods of delivery. The accreditation of individual programs, such as those preparing students to practice a profession (athletic training, education, social work, nursing, etc.), is carried out by specialized or program accrediting bodies that apply specific standards for curriculum and course content. The Higher Learning Commission does not provide a list of programs offered by its accredited institutions. Each specialized accrediting body publishes a list of programs it accredits.

The Higher Learning Commission has two options that a college or university can use to demonstrate their commitment to providing a quality education 鈥� the Standard Pathway and the Open Pathway. In both cases, the institution is expected to meet quality assurance standards and pursue institutional improvement. In the Open Pathway, the improvement component is specified by the institution through the Quality Initiative.

Ohio Guarantee+ is the Quality Initiative project for 91探花. For more information, please visit OHIO Guarantee+ | 91探花.

Institutions that do not sufficiently demonstrate compliance with accreditation standards may be asked for monitoring reports or placed on the public sanctions of 鈥淣otice鈥� or 鈥淧robation.鈥� The institution is typically given a period of time (e.g., two years) to come into compliance with the accreditation standards.