YU Warned It May Lose Accreditation

Yeshiva University is warned that it may lose its accreditation because it can't prove that it has complied with all accreditation requirements.

Public Disclosure Statement

Yeshiva University

November 15, 2012

By the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

This statement has been developed for use in responding to public inquiries, consistent with the Commission’s policies on Public Communication in the Accrediting Process, Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation, and Standardized Language for Commission Actions on Accreditation. It should be read in conjunction with the Statement of Accreditation Status for   Yeshiva University, a copy of which is attached. The policies listed above explain what information the Commission makes public regarding its member institutions and what information remains confidential, describe the various accreditation actions the Commission can take, and define the terms used in the Commission’s actions.

Yeshiva University, located in New York City, is a private, non-profit university. It has been accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education since 1948. Yeshiva University offers programs leading to Associate’s, Bachelor’s, Master’s, Doctor’s-Professional Practice, and Doctor’s-Research/Scholarship degrees. A full listing of the institution’s additional locations and other instructional sites is noted in the Statement of Accreditation Status. A summary of the most recent Commission actions relative to the institution’s accreditation follows.

Current Accreditation Status

On November 15, 2012 the Commission acted to Warn the institution that its accreditation may be in jeopardy because of insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Accreditation Standard 10 (Faculty) and Standard 14 (Assessment of Student Learning). The full text of the Commission’s action is provided below. The Commission’s accreditation standards are available online at http://www.msche.org/publications/CHX-2011-WEB.pdf.

Yeshiva University remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education while on Warning.

The Commission places an institution on Warning when, in the Commission’s judgment, the institution is not in compliance with one or more Commission accreditation standards. When the Commission Warns an institution, it believes that, although the institution is out of compliance, the institution has the capacity both to make appropriate improvements within a reasonable period and to sustain itself in the long term. A follow-up report, called a monitoring report, is required to demonstrate that the institution has made appropriate improvements to bring itself into compliance. A small team visit also is conducted to verify institutional status and progress. 

Summary of Recent Commission Actions

The Commission takes accreditation action after a review of information regarding the institution’s compliance with the Commission’s standards. Typically, these actions follow an on-site evaluation, a periodic review report (PRR), a follow-up report, or substantive change request, or occur at any other time that an institution’s accreditation is reviewed. The Commission may conduct an accreditation review at any time if it has evidence that the institution may no longer meet the Commission’s requirements of affiliation or accreditation standards. Yeshiva University submitted its decennial self-study to the Commission and underwent a visit by a team of peer evaluators during the 2011-2012 academic year.

On November 15, 2012, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education acted as follows:

To Warn the institution that its accreditation may be in jeopardy because of insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Standard 10 (Faculty) and Standard 14 (Assessment of Student Learning).  To note that the institution remains accredited while on Warning. To request a monitoring report, due  September 1, 2013, documenting evidence that the institution has achieved and can sustain compliance with Standards 10 and 14, including but not limited to (1) the development, approval, and dissemination of clear procedures and policies governing faculty appointment, promotion, tenure, and grievance processes; (2) evidence that faculty have appropriate input into the design, maintenance, and updating of curricula (Standard 10); (3) the development and implementation and documentation of an organized and sustained assessment process to evaluate and improve student learning; (4) evidence of direct methods of assessment of student learning at the institutional and program levels; (5) evidence that student learning assessment information is used to improve teaching and learning (Standard 14). To further request that the monitoring report document evidence of (6) the development of  a comprehensive, integrated, collaboratively developed strategic plan (Standard 2) and (7) steps taken to strengthen collegial governance (Standard 4). A small team visit will follow submission of the report. To direct a prompt Commission liaison guidance visit. The PRR report due date will be set when accreditation is reaffirmed.

Current Status and Expected Activities   

Yeshiva University remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education while on Warning.   

Following submission of a monitoring report on September 1, 2013, the Commission will conduct a small team visit to assess the institution’s compliance with the Commission’s accreditation standards. Following the on-site visit, a report by the visiting team will be completed. The monitoring report, the small team report and the institutional response to the small team report will be considered by the Committee on Follow-Up Activities. The Commission will take action following the review by the Committee on Follow-up Activities.

When the Commission takes action, it will do so in accordance with the Commission’s policy, Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation (available at http://www.msche.org/documents/RangeofCommissionActions103012.pdf ). If the Commission determines that progress sufficient to demonstrate compliance with its accreditation standards has not been made, the Commission may take further action as allowed under the Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation. 

For More Information

The following resources provide additional information that may be helpful in understanding the Commission’s actions and Yeshiva University’s accreditation status:

Statement of Accreditation Status for Yeshiva University

(http://www.msche.org/institutions_directory.asp) provides factual information about Yeshiva University and the full text of the Commission’s recent actions regarding the institution.

Media Backgrounder (http://www.msche.org/documents/Media%20Backgrounder%202012.doc) answers questions about accreditation, such as “What is accreditation?” and “What is the Middle States Commission on Higher Education?”

Informing the Public about Accreditation (www.chea.org/public_info/index.asp), published by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, provides additional information on the nature and value of accreditation.

Comments

[Jack]

Wow, lots of words that say nothing. Just what deficiencies are they complaining about in simple English.

[Matty]

You should update that - the accreditation was renewed. http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking-news/yu-warned-accreditation-agency

[Garnel Ironheart]

This has got to be a bad joke.

[Shmarya]

You should update that - the accreditation was renewed. http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/breaking-news/yu-warned-accreditation-agency

Posted by: Matty | December 05, 2012 at 01:49 PM

No.

YOU should follow the links in my post.

YU has accreditation BUT UNDER WARNING. It apparently came close to having no accreditation at all.

The accrediting body will decide over the coming months if YU has complied or not, if it has made the required changes or not.

If it hasn't, it loses its accreditation.

[ruthie]

wow

[AJ]

Sometimes, I wonder if the Orthodox world has gone mad.

[PulpitRabbi]

Having been involved in the accreditation of another school, in a different city, I can report that these kind of qualified accreditations for transitory periods are quite normal.

This kind of report merely means that either the documentation shows that the university needs to get along with the times and use newer standards that were not in force a decade ago, that the university is not fully in compliance (usually because of disagreement regarding how to implement a standard, or oversight), or simply that the documentation provided did not sufficiently elaborate on the points mentioned in the report.

As there are many programs and many standards that need documenting, it is not surprising that an academic institution under review is found not to be fully compliant with some standards. Standard procedure in such cases is to give the institution a certain amount of time to either fix compliance, or document that it was compliant all along, whichever applies.

In other words, nothing earth shattering here, merely evidence that the accreditation process is no rubber stamping. That benefits everybody in the end.

[Shmarya]

Posted by: PulpitRabbi | December 05, 2012 at 02:46 PM

Actually, these warnings are uncommon, not common, and they follow a period of asking for compliance but not getting it (or not getting documentation of it).

YU has a problem with how it treats faculty with regard to what is taught and it has certain other problems – and it is these problems that caused the warning.

[Jack]

it has certain other problems – and it is these problems that caused the warning.

Posted by: Shmarya | December 05, 2012 at 02:56 PM

... which are?

[Shmarya]

it has certain other problems – and it is these problems that caused the warning.

Posted by: Shmarya | December 05, 2012 at 02:56 PM

... which are?

Posted by: Jack | December 05, 2012 at 04:24 PM

Which are clearly cited in my post.

Here's the money quote:

To Warn the institution that its accreditation may be in jeopardy because of insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Standard 10 (Faculty) and Standard 14 (Assessment of Student Learning). To note that the institution remains accredited while on Warning. To request a monitoring report, due September 1, 2013, documenting evidence that the institution has achieved and can sustain compliance with Standards 10 and 14, including but not limited to (1) the development, approval, and dissemination of clear procedures and policies governing faculty appointment, promotion, tenure, and grievance processes; (2) evidence that faculty have appropriate input into the design, maintenance, and updating of curricula (Standard 10); (3) the development and implementation and documentation of an organized and sustained assessment process to evaluate and improve student learning; (4) evidence of direct methods of assessment of student learning at the institutional and program levels; (5) evidence that student learning assessment information is used to improve teaching and learning (Standard 14). To further request that the monitoring report document evidence of (6) the development of a comprehensive, integrated, collaboratively developed strategic plan (Standard 2) and (7) steps taken to strengthen collegial governance (Standard 4).

[Jack]

it has certain other problems – and it is these problems that caused the warning.

Posted by: Shmarya | December 05, 2012 at 02:56 PM

... which are?

Posted by: Jack | December 05, 2012 at 04:24 PM

Which are clearly cited in my post.

I see, paperwork. No wonder why we are country of lawyers.

You can't install a piece of software this day and age with having to click on the dreaded "I Agree" button attached to paragraphs of meaningless mumbo-jumbo.

Sigh!

[Crusty]

The Powers That Be want YU to come up with a quantitative measurement of how much students are learning. Tests and papers don't count. It's a fuzzy concept without real definition, meaning, or valid use to anyone or anything. My guess- schools which don't have this problem have come up with a snappy Power Point presentation.

[Torah Doesn't Mada]

Does anybody seriously believe that YU is a real university?

[Rocky]

When schools are warned about the possibility of losing accreditation, money problems are often an issue. Is YU facing difficulties because of all of the money it lost with Madoff? YU lost at least $14 million in principal with Madoff. If fictitious profits are included, the losses totalled $110 million. See: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-madoff-scandal-and-the-future-of-american-jewry/

In 2011, YU reported an endowment of $1.125 billion vs. $1.410 billion in 2007. On a perecentage basis, YU has done worse than other schools with large endowments ($1 billion +) since 2007. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment

[Rocky]

The last reference should be:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment

[Rocky]

This web site keeps cutting off the last two words of my second reference: _by_endowment.

[thinking outloud]

According to the accrediting agency's website YU has an unqualified accreditation...

Would't they have to note that they are on some sort of warning?

http://www.msche.org/institutions_view.asp?idinstitution=553

[thinking outloud]

I take that back-- there is a small red link on the bottom of the report...
sorry

[M]

This apparently went under the radar:

STATEMENT OF ACCREDITATION STATUS

MEDGAR EVERS COLLEGE OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
1650 Bedford Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11225
Phone: (718) 270-4900; Fax: (718) 270-5126
www.mec.cuny.edu

Public Disclosure Statement

Medgar Evers College

November 15, 2012

By the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

Medgar Evers College remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education while on Warning.

The Commission places an institution on Warning when, in the Commission’s judgment, the institution is not in compliance with one or more Commission accreditation standards. When the Commission Warns an institution, it believes that, although the institution is out of compliance, the institution has the capacity both to make appropriate improvements within a reasonable period and to sustain itself in the long term. A follow-up report, called a monitoring report, is required to demonstrate that the institution has made appropriate improvements to bring itself into compliance. A small team visit also is conducted to verify institutional status and progress.

Summary of Recent Commission Actions

Five years after its accreditation has been reaffirmed by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, an institution is required to submit to the Commission a Periodic Review Report. The PRR is a retrospective, current, and prospective analysis of the institution. As an essential phase of the accreditation cycle, the PRR should demonstrate that the institution meets the standards by which the Commission reaffirms or denies accreditation. Medgar Evers College submitted its PRR to the Commission during Spring 2012. The PRR was subsequently reviewed by the Commission’s PRR readers and by the Committee on Periodic Review Reports.

On November 15, 2012, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education acted as follows:

To document receipt of the Periodic Review Report, noting that the report provided limited responses to requested information and necessitated extraordinary effort by the Commission's representatives. To Warn the institution that its accreditation may be in jeopardy because of insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with Standard 2 (Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal), Standard 7 (Institutional Assessment), and Standard 14 (Assessment of Student Learning). To note that the institution remains accredited while on Warning. To request a monitoring report, due September 1, 2013, documenting that the institution has achieved and can sustain compliance with Standards 2, 7, and 14, including but not limited to evidence of (1) the implementation of a comprehensive strategic planning process that incorporates financial and enrollment projections (Standard 2); (2) the development and implementation of a comprehensive, organized, and sustained process for the assessment of institutional effectiveness with evidence that assessment information is used in budgeting and planning (Standard 7); and (3) the development and implementation of a comprehensive, organized, and sustained process for the assessment of student learning at the institution, program, and course levels, including general education (Standard 14). To direct a prompt Commission liaison guidance visit to discuss the Commission's expectations for reporting. A small team visit will follow submission of the monitoring report. The date for the next evaluation visit will be set when accreditation is reaffirmed.

[Jef]

Public Disclosure Statement

Medgar Evers College

November 15, 2012

By the Middle States Commission on Higher Education

Medgar Evers College remains accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education while on Warning.

Where is Al Sharpton when you need him!

[Yochanan Lavie]

YU is asking "Why me?"

[namechangedtoprotectmyinnocence]

from President Joel's letter:

As I indicated in my State Of The University Address, of the fourteen standards addressed by the site team, we were warned that we are not yet in compliance with the two standards dealing with Faculty (Standard 10) and Student Assessment (Standard 14).

Last spring, following the preliminary report of the Middle States site evaluation team, we began addressing these issues. A Faculty Council, comprised of elected members of the faculties of each of the Manhattan Campus Schools, has been working effectively since February 2012. A Council sub-committee has revised the Faculty Handbook, clarifying the policies on faculty appointments, promotion, tenure, and grievance procedures. The Faculty Handbook has been approved by the Faculty Council and me and will be presented to the Board of Trustees. In addition, the Provost will chair an action group which will provide oversight to ensure further faculty involvement in strategic planning and curricula development.

Assessment refers to processes put into place to evaluate and improve student learning. We believe progress on this standard will advance now that Ariel Fishman, Director of the Department of Institutional Research, has thankfully returned from a prolonged medical absence. The provost will also enlist the assistance of faculty to guide curricula changes that will reflect the results of the student assessments.

In September 2013, as per their request, we will provide the Middle States Commission with a report on our progress in these areas. We are confident that our actions will elicit a positive response.

[Moshe]

YU should lose its accreditation because they don't spend enough time learning gemara.

[PulpitRabbi]

@Shmarya wrote: Actually, these warnings are uncommon, not common, and they follow a period of asking for compliance but not getting it (or not getting documentation of it).

The accreditation I was involved in resulted in accreditation with warning and with qualification (depends on which standard, some issues needed to be provably addressed, while others the school could deal with on its own) and the opinion of the team was that such findings were not uncommon.

So it's your word vs. my experience. (admittedly the accreditation I worked on was not by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, as I was doing that in a different geograpihc area, so accreditation culture could be different, but I doubt differences are too significant - accreditation is, after all, meant to make education in different schools comparable).

[Shmarya]

I tell you what. Check the Middle States Commission on Higher Education's website and see how many current warnings there are as compared to the number of schools it accredits. And then we'll see how common it is.

[rosenberg]

THIS HAD 6000 HITS AND A MAJOR PETITION FROM STUDENTS. RABBI ROSENBERG

I believe Y.U.is a fantastic school,however I POINT OUT THE FOLLOWING:

Driving to teach Public Speaking at Yeshiva College last Spring I received a call stating that the speech department is closing at YU. I was the first speech major at Yeshiva College in 1969 and together with Dr. Abraham Tauber of Blessed memory created the first speech department at Yeshiva College. I have taught at Yeshiva College in the 70's, 80's and in the last 4 years. According to my observations, shiurim are too large and Rebbes are unable to develop close relationships with students. How much do the administrators and officers make? You would be astonished. Why fire talented adjuncts while keeping full teachers who are not evaluated and cannot teach? Consider the YU nepotism which gives untalented people jobs. There seem to be a lot of people running around doing nothing and getting paid. The cafeteria food is terrible and costs too much. Students are overworked with religious requirements which make it impossible to devote enough time to secular work. This has to be reevaluated. ?Rabbi DR. Bernhard Rosenberg
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F8BZHn8De8