HLC assesses assurance and improvement efforts at institutions on the Standard Pathway during the comprehensive evaluations conducted in Year 4 and Year 10 of the pathway cycle. Institutions may also be required to address improvement through interim monitoring.
As part of the comprehensive evaluation, institutions demonstrate their improvement efforts in an expanded Assurance Filing. Institutions should focus on improvements related to HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation. Institutions on the Standard Pathway are expected to demonstrate improvement addressing concerns from past evaluations. Institutions without previously identified improvement requirements, or those that have selected the Standard Pathway, may identify and showcase improvement in areas of their choice.
Resources for Institutions on the Standard Pathway
HLC offers institutions on the Standard Pathway assistance in formulating improvement plans and feedback on plans that have been drafted. Although participation is not required, HLC encourages institutions to take advantage of the offerings.
HLC’s assistance to institutions does not guarantee approval or successful completion of the institution’s improvement component on the Standard Pathway. Instead, institutions will gain an understanding of how to draft strong Assurance Arguments that highlight the strides institutions have made in improvement.
Standard Pathway Q&A Webinars
HLC hosts a series of one-hour webinars where participants have the opportunity to ask questions about any topic related to the Standard Pathway, including the Assurance System, embedded improvement, monitoring, etc. This is not a formal presentation and attendees are encouraged to fully participate in an open exchange. Representatives from all institutions on the Standard Pathway are welcome to participate.
Standard Pathway Seminars
Institutions on the Standard Pathway that are within two years of a comprehensive evaluation are invited to attend a one-day, in-person seminar on addressing improvement in the Assurance Argument. Seminars are held multiple times a year and are located throughout HLC’s region to provide easy access to member institutions. Invitations will be sent to the Accreditation Liaison Officer, Assurance System Coordinator and Chief Academic Officer. The next seminars will be held in spring 2017, and more information about these events will be available later this fall.
At the seminar, institutional teams develop strategies to demonstrate improvement within the Criteria for Accreditation. The team identifies topics it wishes to focus on during the comprehensive evaluation process and leaves the event with recommendations and tentative plans about the ways to address previously identified issues of improvement. In a series of focused exercises, teams draft ideas regarding the Assurance Argument, from philosophy and goals to events and action strategies. The minimum team size is three people, although institutions may send up to five people.
Assurance Argument Improvement Plan Feedback
In the academic year preceding the comprehensive evaluation, institutions on the Standard Pathway will receive an invitation from HLC to submit an improvement plan for feedback. The email will be sent to the Chief Executive Officer with copies to the Accreditation Liaison Officer and Assurance System Coordinator.
The institution’s plan should be submitted via email to its HLC staff liaison within one month of the invitation. Once submitted, the institution’s HLC staff liaison will read the plan and provide comments, typically within four to six weeks.
The improvement plan should be 500 to 800 words outlining how improvement will be addressed within the Assurance Argument. Within the plan, the institution should identify any concerns outlined during its last comprehensive evaluation, any interim monitoring and/or substantive change actions, the topical area(s) to be addressed, and the Core Components where the information will be addressed in the Assurance Argument.
The staff liaison’s comments are intended to clarify expectations regarding the issues to be addressed within the Assurance Argument. For instance, an institution’s HLC staff liaison may point out a previously identified concern the institution had missed in the plan. The institution will then have an opportunity to address any issues prior to the Assurance Filing. HLC liaisons do not “approve” or “endorse” plans, but simply provide comments to the institution.