University of Cincinnati Self-Study Plan Outline
In seeking re-accreditation from the Higher Learning Commission, a nongovernmental organization granting peer-reviewed accreditation and membership in the Higher Learning Commission/North Central Association, the university has completed a two-year self-study with broad participation from across the university community.
The self-study has been guided by the five Criteria for Accrediation as established by the Higher Learning Commission:
- Mission and Integrity
- Preparing for the Future
- Student Learning and Effective Teaching
- Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge
- Engagement and Service
Major Components of the Self Study:
Appointment of steering committee co-chairs:
University of Cincinnati Provost Anthony J. Perzigian appointed Lawrence J. Johnson, dean of the College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services, along with Ralph Katerberg, associate professor, College of Business, to serve as co-chairs of the steering committee.
Appointment of steering committee, academic coordinating committee, and writing team members:
The steering committee represents colleges and offices from across the university and includes Student Body President Ryan Rosensweig. Steering committee members were appointed by Provost Perzigian. The steering committee met monthly to discuss the progress of the self study. The following UC representatives make up the membership of the Self-Study Steering Committee:
- Lawrence J. Johnson, dean, College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services (co-chair)
- Ralph Katerberg, associate professor, College of Business (co-chair)
- Cheryl Albrecht, associate dean, University Libraries
- Peg Allensworth, senior associate vice president, Administration and Finance
- John Bryan, interim vice provost for Academic Personnel, Office of the Provost
- Charles Collins, associate dean, College of Medicine
- Gigi Escoe, vice provost, Assessment & Student Learning
- Thomas Hadley, associate vice president, Student Affairs and Services
- Laura Kretschmer, professor, College of Allied Health Sciences
- Beth McGrew, associate vice president, Campus Planning and Design
- Lee Mortimer, director, Institutional Research
- Nelson Vincent, associate dean, College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services
- Tina Whalen, department head, Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Allied Health Sciences
- James Radley, Student Body President, 2007-2008
- Ryan Rosensweig, Student Body President, 2008-2009
- Kyle Snider, speaker of the Senate, Student Government, 2008-2009
- Dawn Fuller, public information officer, Governmental Relations and University Communications
- Simon Jorgenson, graduate assistant
The Academic Coordinating Committee oversees the review, coordination, and approval of academic programs for the university. The committee is represented by Andrea Lindell, dean, College of Nursing (ex-officio); and Kristi Nelson, senior vice provost for Academic Planning (ex-officio).
Members of the writing teams were appointed jointly by the steering committee and writing team co-chairs. The writing team members were selected based on their expertise, interdisciplinary focus, and ability to represent UC's programs.
Criterion One: Mission and Integrity
The university operates with integrity to ensure the fulfillment of its mission through structures and processes that involve the board, the administration, faculty, staff and students.
Co-chairs: Cheryl Albrecht, associate dean, UC Libraries; Charles Collins, associate dean, College of Medicine
Team Members: Marianne Kunnen-Jones, special assistant for University Communications, Office of the President/Governmental Relations and University Communications; Karen Monzel, associate dean, College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning (DAAP); Nancy Creaghead, head of the department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, College of Allied Health Sciences; Ann Welsh, professor of management, College of Business; Stacy Downing, director, Office of Student Activities and Leadership Development (SALD)
Criterion Two: Preparing for the Future
The university’s allocation of resources and its processes for evaluation and planning demonstrate its capacity to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its education and respond to future challenges and opportunities.
Co-chairs: Peg Allensworth, senior associate vice president, Administration and Finance; Tom Cruse, associate provost
Team Members: Mary Beth McGrew, associate vice president of Campus Planning and Design, Office of the University Architect; Carol Metzger, Office of the Controller, Administration and Finance; Mike Lieberman, dean, Instructional Research and Computing; Xinhao Wang, professor of planning, College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning
Criterion Three: Student Learning and Effective Teaching
The university provides evidence of student learning and teaching effectiveness that demonstrates it is fulfilling its educational mission.
Co-chairs: John Bryan, interim vice provost for Academic Personnel; Laura Kretschmer, professor, College of Allied Health Sciences
Team Members: Pamela Person, director of the Center for First Year Experience (FYE) and Learning Communities; Wayne Hall, vice provost, Faculty Development; Carol Tonge Mack, assistant academic director, Center for Exploratory Studies; Brenda LeMaster, professor, Professional Practice; Ricardo Moena, associate professor, mathematical sciences, McMicken College of Arts & Sciences; Amy Pettigrew, associate professor, College of Nursing; Missy Laine, professor of literacy and assistant department head for humanities, media and cultural studies, College of Applied Science; Lora Arduser, field service assistant professor, English and comparative literature, McMicken College of Arts & Sciences; Lisa Meloncon, assistant professor, English and comparative literature, McMicken College of Arts & Sciences
Criterion Four: Acquisition, Discovery and Application of Knowledge
The university promotes a life of learning for its faculty, administration, staff and students by fostering and supporting inquiry, creativity, practice and social responsibility in ways consistent with its mission.
Co-chairs: Gigi Escoe, vice provost, Assessment & Student Learning; Tina Whalen, department head, rehabilitation sciences, College of Allied Health Sciences
Team Members: Mitch Leventhal, vice provost, UC International; Barbara Bardes, professor of political science, McMicken College of Arts & Sciences; Paul Bishop, professor of engineering, College of Engineering; Janice Denton, professor, chemical sciences, Raymond Walters College; Bob Zierolf, associate university dean, the Graduate School; Michael Sharp, assistant director, Academic Community Partnerships; Julie Burdick, director of Academic Planning and Assessment
Criterion Five: Engagement and Service
As called for by its mission, the university identifies its constituencies and serves them in ways that both value.
Co-chairs: Thomas Hadley, associate vice president, Student Affairs and Services; Frank Russell, director, UC Community Design Center
Team Members: Mary Stagaman, associate vice president, Governmental Relations and University Communications and executive director, Center for the City; Dorothy Air, associate senior vice president, Entrepreneurial Affairs; George Vredeveld, director, UC Economics Center for Education & Research; Gerry Siegert, associate vice president, Community Development; Esther Erkins, senior research associate, College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services; Kathy Dick, director, UC Center for Community Engagement (CCE)
Communication has been integral to this two-year effort. The self-study communication plan has complemented the established UC governance and joint communication-consultant processes including faculty, staff, student, and community stakeholders.
The HLC/NCA re-accreditation communication process has been based on two guiding principles:
Transparency has been accomplished through regular reports to the university community, in person, print, and via the Web. All interested persons have had access to basic information about the process including leadership, meeting schedules, reports, and data. In this way, broad participation has been encouraged. Interested parties, wherever feasible, have attended working sessions, offering suggestions and providing comment on the process.