Lehigh Receives Reaccreditation through the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

Lehigh has received reaccreditation from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), one of several regional accreditation authorities recognized by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation and the U. S. Department of Education. Regional accreditation is required for institutions whose students receive federal financial aid. It also asserts Lehigh’s legitimacy as a higher education institution.

“We are pleased with the results as well as with the entire reaccreditation process, which allowed the university community to engage in a critical investigation and review of all that we do and how we do it,” said Lehigh President John Simon. “Through this process, we reaffirmed our mission, provided evidence of how our decisions and actions support this mission, and assessed our success in achieving our goals. This critical self-reflection, paired with suggestions from the peer review team, will help us plan for an even brighter future for Lehigh.”

In preparation for the MSCHE peer review team’s April 2018 campus visit, the university began in 2015 a lengthy and intensive self-study process. This marked an opportunity for the university to demonstrate that its programs, policies and priorities are aligned with its institutional mission and goals, as well as demonstrate internal and external accountability.

The self-study coordinating committee included tri-chairs Jennifer M. Jensen, deputy provost for academic affairs and associate professor of political science; Gerard P. (Jerry) Lennon, professor of civil and environmental engineering; and Steven Wilson, assistant provost for academic affairs and registrar. Debra Rubart, now coordinator in the Office of Fellowship Advising within the Office of International Affairs, managed the self-study project.

The university established eight working groups comprised of faculty and staff, one for each MSCHE standard and one for the compliance requirements, which was charged specifically with gathering the evidence to show that Lehigh is operating in accord with various federal and state regulations. Selected working groups included undergraduate and graduate student representatives. Working groups completed the bulk of their work—which included many hours of research, writing and editing—during the 2016-2017 academic year and submitted final reports in May 2017.

“[Each working group] had to interpret their own standard and its criteria, and then evaluate the evidence that Lehigh had met—or was not meeting—those expectations,” explained Wilson. “The members of the groups brought their own knowledge and context to their task, rather than having a central direction from above. We asked the working groups to keep the tri-chairs informed of progress, of course, and to ask for help or guidance if they needed it, but the fact was that the working groups were largely autonomous… Each draft chapter was thoroughly documented and referenced evidence to support its members’ conclusions about the standard. This diverse approach to the material is what made the resulting self-study report so rich in detail and useful."

The individual working group reports became the basis for the university’s self-study report, which was edited by the tri-chairs for consistency and style. A draft of the self-study was published for the campus community in fall 2017, and community members were invited to provide feedback in advance of the arrival of the Middle States Commission peer review team’s April 2018 visit.

“I think the most important part about [Middle States] is it forces you to think about what you want to achieve,” said Dominic Packer, associate professor of psychology and associate dean for research and graduate programs for the College of Arts and Sciences. The departments and programs in the college, Packer said, were encouraged to think about three key things: “What do we want to achieve, what would success look like, and how would we know?

“And this is what we should be doing anyway, and in many cases are… but the Middle States process forced us to become more explicit about it, more deliberative and careful about it.”

Arpana Inman, professor of counseling psychology and Iacocca Endowed Chair in the  Department of Education and Human Services, served as co-lead of the working group for Standard I: Mission and Goals.

“The evaluations that we need to do to keep with accreditation standards speaks to an iterative process of improvement that is important to keep up with the changing landscape of education,” Inman said. “This type of rigor, updating of curriculum, and assessment of competencies through well-thought-out degree and certificate programs are certainly important for a college of education given the nature of curriculum (education and human services) and the direct impact it has on the public at large… The self-study revealed that the College of Education’s mission and goals are well aligned with the university's goals and carefully developed with both internal and external constituents in mind.”

Tom Hammond, associate professor of teaching, learning, and technology and associate dean in the College of Education, added, “The Middle States process was a great opportunity for the College of Education to reflect on our two primary forms of work—professional certification and research—and see how the patterns of activity in each can inform and impact the other.”

Said Wilson: “Because we had been thorough, taken the process seriously, and had been honest about the information we collected, we were able to make sound judgments about ourselves well before the MSCHE visit,” said Wilson. “We had already begun to make improvements we think were warranted. This fulfilled President Simon's instructions to the chairs of the self-study: Make the self-study process and the resulting report useful for Lehigh, and not just an exercise to meet Middle States' requirements. Lehigh had embarked on the Path to Prominence, and President Simon wanted our detailed work for the reaccreditation process to do double-duty for future strategic planning.”

During the peer review team’s visit, members met with many members of the Lehigh community, including leadership, administration, faculty, staff and students.

“I found the review process to be more conversational and collegial than I expected,” said Jack Lule, Iacocca Professor and Chair of the Department of Journalism and Communication. “The committee members seemed genuinely interested in the university and what we are trying to accomplish. I did not get the feeling that we were being ‘judged’—I felt we were being engaged.”

One peer review team member arranged for a site visit to a study abroad program in Cuba led by Lule.

“Like many faculty and staff, I thought of Middle State accreditation as a kind of faceless process. I was surprised then when one of the committee members arranged for a site visit to my study abroad program in Cuba,” said Jack Lule, professor of journalism. “This was not a plum assignment! In many ways, Cuba is still a developing country. But I was impressed by the thoroughness of the site visit. The Middle States representative had obviously done his homework and knew all about the program. But he also took time to speak at length with me and my students.”

At the conclusion of the visit, the peer review team provided suggestions and recommendations. The team’s report can be found here.

“One of the great things about the Middle States process is that the final evaluation came from our peers,” said Lennon. “The Middle States team was composed of professors and administrators from other institutions with the same kind of demands and needs as Lehigh. Having been in the same ‘trenches’ allowed them to recognize that Lehigh took the self-study seriously and responsibly self-identified where future attention ought to be focused. This process allowed a consultative process, allowing our reasonable and realistic self-study goals to be the cornerstone of their evaluation, leading to a productive conclusion supported by both Lehigh and the evaluative team. Although the team’s recommendations cite work that needs to be done, it is mostly what we recommended to ourselves. This process is not always adopted by other accreditation agencies and institutions.”

The peer review team praised Lehigh for its important work and provided a clear directive to continue this work.

“The Team found Lehigh University to be a financially secure, well managed, institution of learning blessed with an enthusiastic board of trustees, strong faculty, supportive staff, and philanthropic alumni all of whom are dedicated to the fulfilment of the Institution’s stated Mission,” reads the team’s report.

“The Middle States reaccreditation process invited the Lehigh community to examine closely our goals and objectives and determine what we can do to improve our effectiveness in achieving them,” said Provost Pat Farrell. “In particular, Middle States has high expectations for and requires clear documentation of evidence of student learning outcomes and assessment of student learning. This was a valuable process for the university, and we are thankful to all those who contributed to it.” 

The U.S. Department of Education relies on regional accreditors for each region of the country to oversee and accredit higher education institutions. Middle States accredits institutions in Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and several locations abroad. The accreditation process follows an 8-year cycle.

Lehigh’s next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2026-2027.