<iframe src="//www.googletagmanager.com/ns.html?id=GTM-NP2ZK8" height="0" width="0" style="display:none;visibility:hidden"></iframe> The Self-Study

The Self-Study

Overview

Naropa University undertook a self-study with broad participation from across the university community in order to reaffirm its accreditation with the Higher Learning Commission.

Goals

The self-study was guided by the five Criteria for Accreditation as established by the Higher Learning Commission:

  1. Mission
  2. Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct
  3. Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
  4. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement
  5. Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness

Major Components of the Self Study

Appointment of Steering Committee members: In Spring 2013, representatives from around the university were invited to join the self-study steering committee. Subcommittee Chairs were invited to lead the research and writing of individual criteria and to invite other team members to assist with this effort.

Committees

Subcommittee Chairs invited members to join their teams as active participants or consulting members. The committee members were selected based on their expertise, interdisciplinary focus, and ability to represent Naropa’s programs and policies.

Criterion One: Mission

The institution’s mission is clear and articulated publicly; it guides the institution’s operations.

Chair: Deborah Bowman
Committee Members: Marty Janowitz, Judith Simmer-Brown and Reed Bye

Criterion Two: Integrity: Ethical and Responsible Conduct

The institution acts with integrity; its conduct is ethical and responsible.

Chair: Joy Valania
Committee Members: Bob Cillo, Angie Gossett and Danielle Poitras

Criterion Three: Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources, and Support

The institution provides high quality education, wherever and however its offerings are delivered.

Chairs: Janet Cramer, Carole Clements, Barbara Catbagan, Christine Caldwell, Cheryl Barbour
Committee Members: Susan Martich, Jirka Hladis, Ted Lamb, Jeremy Lowry, Carol Frederick, Don Matthews, Sarah Harding, Matt Peterson, Lia Barnes, Bob Cillo, Lily Board, Amy Munger, Sarah Steward and the Student Affairs staff

Criterion Four: Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement

The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

Chairs: Ted Lamb, Cheryl Barbour, Christine Caldwell, Janet Cramer
Committee Members: Jeremy Lowry, Elaine Yuen, Lynn DiLorenzo, Mari Dark, Carole Clements, Lia Barnes, Susan Martich, Michael Franklin, Wendy Allen, Nancy Morrell, Sarah Steward, Melissa Holland, Bob Cillo and Lily Board

Criterion Five: Resources, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness

The institution’s resources, structures, and processes are sufficient to fulfill its mission, improve the quality of its educational offerings, and respond to future challenges and opportunities. The institution plans for the future.

Chairs: Todd Kilburn, Deb Piranian, Joy Valania
Committee Members: Dave Edminster, Aaron Cook, Angie Gossett, Patti Warren, John Cobb, Mark Miller, Seann Goodman, Mari Golan, Ted Lamb and Judith Sumner