Middle States Accreditation

Institutional Research

Bucknell has completed a comprehensive self-study as part of the process for re-accreditation by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools.  This process culminated in March 2004 with a three-day visit by a team of 8 peer evaluators from institutions in neighboring mid-Atlantic states. Bucknell's re-accreditation was affirmed on June 25, 2004.

What is Middle States?
Established in 1919, the Middle States Association is one of the "regional accrediting agencies" recognized by the federal government.   It accredits educational institutions within the mid-Atlantic region.

What is accreditation?
Accreditation is part of the tradition of voluntary self-regulation within the independent sector of higher education in the United States.  It involves a comprehensive peer assessment by seasoned higher educational professionals every ten years. At the mid-point of each ten-year cycle, Bucknell must conduct another self-study (a Periodic Review Report), but without a team visit.

The fundamental purpose of accreditation is to assure the quality and effectiveness of Bucknell’s educational programs and services.  More specifically, accreditation seeks to demonstrate:

1.  That the University knows clearly where it wants to go…

  • It has a clear and current mission
  • It has well-defined and appropriate, measurable goals

2.  That the University has the means to get there, i.e., it has established the conditions (the infrastructure) necessary for success

  • Adequate resources
  • Adequate staff
  • A robust planning structure
  • Appropriate procedures, policies, etc.

3.  That the University is in fact succeeding substantially in achieving its goals and objectives

  • Evidence of system-wide assessment, with a particular focus on student learning outcomes that relate to institutional mission and goals
  • The continuing pursuit of improvements in quality and institutional effectiveness at every level of the University
  • A demonstration of the value added by a Bucknell education

What purposes does accreditation serve?

1. Accountability – For prospective students and their parents, the federal government, and the public at large, it provides assurances of educational quality and effective management.

2. Improvements in Institutional Effectiveness – The self-study serves as a means of continuing to improve the quality of the education and services that we provide to our students and other constituencies that we serve.

3. Eligibility for Federal Financial Aid – The federal government has no means of its own for determining eligibility for federal financial aid.  It relies on regional accreditation to determine eligibility.  Non-accredited institutions are not eligible for federal financial aid.

What is new about our accreditation in 2003-04?
The standards and requirements for accreditation have changed dramatically this year with Middle States’ publication of Characteristics of Excellence.  Earlier reviews focused largely on educational inputs (the quality of students and faculty, library holdings, computer resources, financial resources) and educational processes (curricula, teaching methods, etc.).  The new standards require that colleges deal explicitly with outputs or educational outcomes.  How can we demonstrate that Bucknell University is achieving its stated goals for the education of each student? What is the value-added of a Bucknell education?  What do students know, what can they do, what do they value or appreciate that they did not upon entry as first-year students?

Bucknell was among the first cohort of institutions to be accountable for these new standards. The standards affect every aspect of university life for students, faculty, staff, and administrators, beginning with the University’s mission. Importantly, the new standards focus on the assessment of the University’s objectives for student learning. Once Bucknell has determined its goals for student education and personal growth, the University is expected to demonstrate both quantitatively and qualitatively that those goals are being achieved. 

Through a variety of techniques at the institutional and the departmental level—including surveys, exit interviews, focus groups, artistic works and performances, portfolios and capstone courses—Bucknell is seeking to document what students learn and what students experience during their four years. Some of the most important educational outcomes, however, are difficult to measure while students are still in college. The value of a Bucknell education is often more evident 5 to 10 years after graduation, once it has been tested in students’ professional and personal lives.  The University will rely increasingly on surveys of young alumni to gain this additional assessment perspective.

Our primary focus at Bucknell is to provide students with the knowledge, skills, abilities, and perspectives that will enable them to make informed choices leading to productive and engaged professional and personal lives.  Assessment is a means of gauging the effectiveness of these changes in the lives of our students.

Are there other accreditations for which Bucknell is accountable?
Yes.  The University’s review by external agencies is not limited to Middle States.  There are also specialized accrediting agencies aligned with particular disciplines. Bucknell must meet the standards set forth by all of the following dedicated agencies:

  • ABET, the Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology, focuses on the Bachelor of Science curricula in the various engineering disciplines.
  • CSAB, the Computer Sciences Accreditation Board, reviews the Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science within the College of Arts and Sciences.
  • NASM, the National Association of Schools of Music, evaluates the Music Department.
  • On the state level, the Pennsylvania Department of Education oversees teaching certifications in Bucknell’s Education Department.
  • The American Chemical Society is an industry-wide agency that reviews our programs in Chemistry.
  • Bucknell’s athletic programs must also undergo periodic certification reviews by the NCAA.

How is the Middle States Self-Study managed, and what is its relation to Vision 2010?
One of the requirements of Middle States was that we submit a detailed plan for our self-study. We did so on April 25, 2002, in a document entitled Vision 2010: Foundations and the Future, incorporating the Design for the Middle States Self-Study.  As described in that document, Bucknell intended to merge two concurrent and overlapping processes—the Middle States Self-Study and the Vision 2010 Strategic Planning Process—under the direction of a single Steering Committee.  The University also elected to use strategic planning as an organizing theme for the self-study.

Because the University Council is the governing body charged with planning, this group was designated as the Steering Committee, with the addition, as ex officio members, of the two Self-Study Co-Chairs, Lois Huffines (Assoc. VP Academic Affairs) and Jerry Rackoff (Asst. VP Planning and Institutional Research).  Kathy Martin Owens (then Assoc. Dir. Institutional Research & Assessment) was later added as a third ex officio member.) When the strategic planning process was suspended following President Rogers’ announcement of his intent to retire at the end of FY03-04, the Steering Committee for the combined Middle States/Vision 2010 processes became focused on just the self-study.  The design of the self-study was also changed at that time from one that had a thematic focus on strategic planning to a more traditional, comprehensive self-study.

What is the current status of our Middle States review preparations?
Bucknell was engaged in three, concurrent activities leading to the campus visit by a Middle States team in March 2004:

  1. Writing an institutional self-study document
  2. Making preparations for the actual visit by the team in March
  3. Completing an institutional assessment plan

1. The Self-Study Document
According to the new guidelines for accreditation, the self-study document must serve two purposes.  First, it must demonstrate that Bucknell meets all of the fourteen new standards for accreditation.  Second, it must include a comprehensive institutional self-analysis, one outcome of which is an identification of institutional strengths as well as institutional challenges and issues.  With the approval of our Middle States liaison, we have elected to separate these two functions in the body of our report. 

Standards.  Each standard is defined by a bulleted series of Fundamental Elements. Bucknell demonstrates compliance with a given standard by showing that it meets each and every Fundamental Element of that standard.  Addressing each Fundamental Element appropriately requires significant descriptive text about Bucknell’s programs, services, and processes. Given the necessary length of this portion of the self-study, we have elected to place the Standards section after the Institutional Analysis, described below. 

Institutional Analysis.  The requirements of Characteristics of Excellence focus additionally on the institution’s ability to identify its strengths and challenges. No longer a solely descriptive document, the self-study is designed to guide the institution is in a process of self-assessment with the goal of identifying areas for improvement. Bucknell’s comprehensive institutional analysis section is organized as follows:

    • Introduction
    • Institutional Context
      a. History of Accreditation Activities
      b. Institutional Context
    • Institutional Analysis
      a. Institutional Strengths
      b. Institutional Challenges and Issues

2. The Team Visit – March 28-31, 2004
President Roger Hull of Union College in New York State served as Chair of the 8-member Middle States visiting team. On October 28, 2003, we were host to President Hull for a one-day preliminary visit in preparation for the team visit in March 2004.  There were multiple purposes to the visit:  to help President Hull become familiar with the campus and the logistic requirements of the team; to become acquainted with some of the key individuals at Bucknell with whom the visiting team will have to interact; and to begin to understand the nature of Bucknell, the kind of institution it is, and the principal issues with which it is faced.  The visit was candid and productive, and President Hull has subsequently communicated with the individual team members, who have since been named, and give them their individual assignments and directions.

The visiting team included 8 professionals in higher education with expertise in specific areas (i.e., finance, student affairs, student learning assessment). The team members were carefully chosen by Middle States for their expertise and ability to objectively evaluate Bucknell for re-accreditation. The evaluation began on the evening of Sunday, March 28 and concluded the afternoon of Wednesday, March 31. During their 2 1/2 day visit, the team met with various campus constituents to learn as much as possible about Bucknell. In advance of their arrival to campus, the team received numerous Bucknell publications – including the self-study. The team's goal was to observe first-hand how Bucknell operates and to engage the campus in conversations to learn as much as possible about the University. Each team member was given an "assignment" based on his/her area of expertise which focuses the team member’s work and determined the individuals with whom s/he needed to meet.

At the conclusion of the site visit, the team gave an oral report to a small group of representatives from Bucknell, including the President and the Middle States Steering Committee. This oral report is prelimiary, no recommendation regarding accreditation is made at this time. The oral report is a summary of the team’s written report which was sumbitted to Middle States and forwarded to Bucknell. We then had the opportunity to respond to the report to correct errors of fact. Copies of the Middle States Evaluation Report and Bucknell's formal Institutional Response can be found in .pdf form in the non-course specific section of e-reserves (http://eres.bucknell.edu/default.asp). Middle States subsequently evaluated all of the materials and re-affirmed Bucknell's accrediation on June 25, 2004.

The accreditation process is labor intensive and time consuming; however, the benefits of engaging in the effort clearly outweigh the costs. Self-regulation is a critical strength of higher education and the opportunity to engage in a decennial peer review is a powerful demonstration of a commitment to the ideals that built our profession. Bucknell is grateful for the time and effort the campus has devoted to the process.

Suggested Reading:
Council for Higher Education Statement of Mutual Responsibilities for Student Learning Outcomes: Accreditation, Institutions, and Programs (pdf)

Council for Higher Education Letter from the President: The Value of Accreditation: Four Pivotal Roles (May 2003) (pdf)

Related Links:
Middle States Commission on Higher Education
Council for Higer Education Accreditation