Higher Learning Commission (HLC) Accreditation Activities

Institutional Accreditation is a process of continuous improvement with a strong focus on student learning outcomes and institutional effectiveness. Regular and ongoing evaluation of the University’s progress in meeting its learning goals is a part of every institution’s accreditation. The University will host a peer review team from the Higher Learning Commission in  March of 2021 for the next Comprehensive Evaluation review.

Ongoing Accreditation Activities

Program Accreditations at Lake State

Program Accreditations

Individual academic programs may hold specialized accredited by discipline-specific organizations when those programs meet established criteria and performance standards.  Programmatic accreditation is a reflection of a program’s integrity and alignment with recognized quality standards.  Periodic review and re-accreditation of individual programs occurs independently from, but contingent upon, the regional accreditation of the institution.  LSSU participates with the programmatic accreditation organizations listed below. Learn more about: national vs regional accreditation

  • BUSINESS – The following business programs at are accredited by the Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP): Accounting (BS), Business Administration – Entrepreneurship (BS), Business Administration – International Business (BS), Business Administration – Management (BS), Business Administration – Marketing (BS), and Finance & Economics (BS).  http://www.acbsp.org/
  • CHEMISTRY – The Bachelor of Science degrees in Chemistry, Forensic Chemistry, Biochemistry Pre-Professional, Cannabis Chemistry, and Environmental Science Chemistry Concentration are approved by The American Chemical Society Committee on Professional Training, 1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20036. Phone: 202-872-4589. Fax: 202-872-6066. Email: cpt@acs.org. www.acs.org/cpt
  • COMPUTER, ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING – The Computer Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering bachelor’s programs are accredited by the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABETwww.abet.org
  • EDUCATOR PREPARATION – The Educator Preparation Programs at Lake Superior State University are accredited by the Inquiry Brief Commission of the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). 2010 Massachusetts Ave., NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036. Phone: 202-223-0077. www.caepnet.org
  • ELECTRICAL AND MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY – The Electrical Engineering Technology and Manufacturing Engineering Technology bachelor’s programs are accredited by the Engineering Technology Accreditation Commission (ETAC) of ABET, www.abet.org
  • EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES – The certificate program for Paramedic is accredited by CAAHEP and reviewed by CoAEMSP, 8301 Lakeview Pkwy #111-312, Rowlett, TX 75088. Phone: 214-703-8445; www.coaemsp.org.
    The Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) program is authorized through The Michigan Department of Health & Human Services (MDHHS).
  • FIREFIGHTER I and II – The Firefighter I and II Michigan Certification programs are approved by the Pro Board Accrediting Agency, PO Box 690632, Quincy, MA 02269. Phone: 617-984-7474;  http://theproboard.org/
  • CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM – Accredited by the Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement Standards (MCOLES) program. MCOLES evaluates the program, facilities, and instructors on an annual basis. https://www.michigan.gov/mcoles.  927 Centennial Way, Lansing, Michigan 48913. Email: MSP-MCOLES@michigan.gov. Phone: 517-636-7864. Executive Section FAX: 517-636-4774.
  • MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENCE – The bachelor’s degree program in Medical Laboratory Science, with Academic and Clinical tracks, is accredited by the National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences (NAACLS) 5600 N. River Road, Suite 720 Rosemont, IL 60018. Phone: 773.714.8880;  info@naacls.orgwww.naacls.org
  • NURSING – The Bachelor of Science in Nursing is approved by Michigan Board of Nursing and is accredited by

2016 Comprehensive Review

In the Fall 2016, LSSU completed a full comprehensive review leading re-affirmation of our institutional accreditation. The Higher Learning Commission actions and reports are summarized below, along with a record of institutional activities leading up to re-affirmation.

March 8, 2017 HLC issues determination of Continued Accreditation

November 7-8, 2016 HLC Reaccreditation Site Visit

Fall 2016 – Pre-visit Orientation materials

June 2016 – HLC Documentation http://hlcommission.org

March-April 2015

  • The university completed a Multi-Location Site Vist conducted by an HLC reviewer. The reviewer evaluated regional center operations and documented, to the satisfaction of the Higher Learning Commission, the quality and performance of our operation at these locations. No monitoring reports were required. The University is using the feedback provided by this report for continued improvement. HLC Multi-Location Evaluation Visit Report (July 25, 2015)
    • Petoskey Regional Center, 1515 Howard St., Petoskey, MI 49770
    • Escanaba Regional Center, 2001 N. Lincoln, Escanaba, MI 49829

May 2014

July 28, 2013

The HLC has adopted new policies which replaced the older Minimum Expectations. These include:

March 11, 2013

The Higher Learning Commission has reviewed and accepted the monitoring reports submitted in January and no other reports or visits are required.  Our next accreditation visit is scheduled for the 2016-2017 academic year.

The HLC Analysis of the LSSU Monitoring Reports concluded  “Lake Superior State University submitted an excellent and thorough set of monitoring reports. The report indicates remarkable progress in all four areas of concern to the 2011 comprehensive visit team. The University is commended for its effectiveness in addressing all of these issues and for setting forth the accomplishments of the University with respect to these issues in well organized and informative monitoring reports.”

February 1, 2013

The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association has completed a ten-year reaccreditation process and awarded the university “Accredited” status.  LSSU’s next scheduled Evaluation will be in 2016-2017.  The HLC’s formal notification and official record of action letter was received on August 24, 2012.

LSSU hosted the reaccreditation site-visit on October 24-26, 2011. The LSSU Self-Study report and associated documents which were submitted in association with this visit are available from the navigation menu on the left. Approximately two months after the visit, the HLC visitation team returned with their findings: Assurance Section: Report of a Comprehensive Visit.

The report noted that LSSU has met all the required criteria for continued accreditation. We were however also required to report to the HLC on the progress in four areas through monitoring reports which were submitted in advance of the February 1, 2013 deadline.

LSSU Monitoring Reports:

 

Public Comment and Complaints

Public Notification and Third Party Comment

Lake Superior State University regularly seeks comments from the public about the University, and in particular at times when preparing for a regular periodic evaluation by its regional accrediting agency, the Higher Learning Commission. The University is hosting a five-member team from the Higher Learning Commission on March 22 and 23, 2021.  The team will review the institution’s ongoing ability to meet the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation. The last Comprehensive Review occurred on March 8, 2017, and the HLC issued a determination of “Continued Accreditation.” Lake Superior State University has held institutional accreditation continuously since 1968.

The public is invited to submit comments to the Higher Learning Commission regarding the University, no later than 4 weeks prior to the next visit:

Third Party Comment on Lake Superior State University
The Higher Learning Commission
230 South LaSalle Street, Suite 7-500
Chicago, IL 60604-1411

The public may also submit comments on the Commission’s Web site:
(https://www.hlcommission.org/HLC-Institutions/third-party-comment.html)

Complaints

Lake Superior State University encourages individuals with complaints involving institutional policies or consumer protection issues to first address their concerns with the University office and staff directly responsible for the area of concern. University policy protects individuals from reprisal for pursuing legitimate complaints, and anonymous complaints will not be reviewed. The University has a formal process for the documentation and recording of internal formal complaints defined in Policy 2.1.10.

In addition, complaints specifically related to distance education may be filed with the Office of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) Office of Consumer Affairs (https://www.michigan.gov/lara/)

LARA’s Corporations, Securities & Commercial Licensing Bureau (CSCL) investigates complaints against any licensed or authorized post-secondary school that are related to acts specifically administered by CSCL.

Finally, complaints about the University which have not been successfully resolved through internal channels may also be referred to the the Office of Attorney General, Consumer Protection Division. with submission of a Consumer Complaint / Inquiry Form.

 

Advisor Statement

LSSU Advisor Statement

All parties are entitled to an advisor of their choosing to guide and accompany them throughout the assessment and/or investigation process. The advisor may be a friend, mentor, family member, attorney, or any other supporter a party chooses to advise them who is both eligible and available. A party may elect to change advisors during the process and are not locked into using the same advisor throughout.

The parties are entitled to be accompanied by their advisor in all meetings and interviews at which the party is entitled to be present, including intake and interviews. Advisors may help their advisees prepare for each meeting and are expected to advise ethically, with integrity and in good faith. The university does not guarantee equal advisory rights, meaning that if one party selects an advisor who is an attorney, but the other does not, the university is not obligated to provide one.

All advisors are subject to the same campus rules, whether they are attorneys or not. Advisors may not present on behalf of their advisees in a meeting or interview and should request or wait for a break in the proceeding if they wish to interact with campus officials. Advisors may confer quietly with their advisees as necessary, as long as they do not disrupt the process. Advisors are expected to refrain from interference with the university investigation and resolution. Any advisor who steps out of their role in any meeting or interview will be warned once and only once. If the advisor continues to disrupt or otherwise fails to respect the limits of the advisor role, the advisor will be asked to leave the meeting.

The University expects an advisor to adjust their schedule to allow them to attend scheduled interviews and meetings. The University does not typically change scheduled meetings to accommodate an advisor’s inability to attend. The University will, when possible, make provisions to allow an advisor to attend a meeting by telephone, video, and/or virtual meeting technologies.

Privacy Statement

LSSU Privacy Statement

All University employees who are involved in LSSU’s Title IX response, including the Title IX Coordinator, Deputy Title IX Coordinator, Assistant Title IX Coordinator, and Title IX Investigators, receive instruction about respecting and safeguarding private information. Throughout the process, every effort will be made to protect the privacy interests of all individuals involved in a manner consistent with the need for a thorough review of the report. Reporting and responding parties are asked to keep details private. Reporting, responding parties and witnesses are not restricted from sharing or discussing information related to a report or allegation with others who may support them or assist them during an investigation process (Policy 1.5.2, Section 3.8, Privacy).

Consent

For all forms of prohibited conduct covered by this policy, the terms consent, force, coercion, and incapacitation are defined as follows:

Consent:

Consent consists of an affirmative, conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed-upon sexual activity. Participants must act freely and voluntarily and have knowledge of the nature of the act involved. The following are essential elements of consent: (1) Consent must be informed and reciprocal. All parties must demonstrate a clear and mutual understanding of the nature and scope of the act to which they are consenting and a willingness to do the same thing, at the same time, in the same way. (2) Consent must be freely and actively given. Consent must be an affirmative action or communication that is freely, actively and voluntarily given. Consent cannot be obtained through the use of force, coercion, threats or intimidation, or by taking advantage of the incapacitation of another individual. (3) Consent must be mutually understandable. Communication regarding consent consists of mutually understandable words and/or actions that indicate a willingness to engage in sexual activity. Consent must be clearly communicated or outwardly demonstrated; therefore, consent cannot be inferred from silence, passivity, lack of resistance, lack of active response, or choice of clothing. For example, an individual’s choice of clothing is not an outward demonstration of consent to a sexual activity. (4) Consent is not indefinite. Consent may be withdrawn by either party at any time. Withdrawal of consent can be a verbally expressed statement, such as “no” or “stop” or can be based on an outward demonstration that conveys that an individual is hesitant, confused, uncertain, or is no longer a willing participant. (5) Consent is limited. Consent to one form of sexual contact does not constitute consent to all forms of sexual contact, nor does consent to one sexual activity with one person constitute consent to activity with any other person.

Force:

Force is the use of, or threat of, physical violence or intimidation to overcome an individual’s freedom of will to choose whether or not to participate in sexual activity. The reporting party does not have to resist the sexual advancement or request in order to establish the use of force; however, resistance by the reporting party will be viewed as a clear demonstration of non-consent. Force can include a wide range of behaviors, including, but not limited to intimidation, manipulation, threats, and blackmail. A person’s words or conduct are sufficient to constitute force if they wrongfully impair another individual’s freedom of will and ability to choose whether or not to engage in sexual activity.

Coercion:

Coercion is the improper use of pressure to compel another individual to engage in or to be the recipient of prohibited conduct. Coercion can include a wide range of behaviors, including, but not limited to intimidation, manipulation, threats, and blackmail. A person’s words or conduct are sufficient to constitute coercion if they interfere with another individual’s freedom of will and ability to consent whether or not to engage in sexual activity.

Incapacitation:

Incapacitation is a state during which an individual lacks the ability (mentally or physically) to make an informed and rational decision to engage in intimate or sexual activity because the individual lacks conscious knowledge of the nature of the act (e.g. to understand the who, what, when, where, why, or how of the sexual interaction) and/or is physically helpless.

Incapacitation may result from the use of alcohol, medication, and/or drugs. The impact of alcohol and drugs varies from person to person. Alcohol consumption, medication usage, and/or use of other drugs can affect a person’s ability to consent. To determine whether a party should have known about the incapacitation, consider the position of a sober, reasonable person. Being intoxicated or impaired by drugs, medication, or alcohol is never an excuse for failing to obtain consent from another person.

An individual is also considered incapacitated, and therefore unable to give consent, when asleep, unconscious, or otherwise unaware that sexual activity is occurring. Incapacitation may also exist because of a mental or developmental disability that impairs the ability to consent to sexual contact.

Key Terms

Prohibited Conduct:

Prohibited conduct includes sexual and gender based discrimination, sexual and gender-based harassment, sexual assault, non-consensual sexual contact, sexual exploitation, stalking, cyber stalking, intimate partner violence, retaliation, and prohibited relationships by persons in authority. Threats or failed attempts to commit any prohibited conduct will be treated as though the misconduct had occurred. When assessing whether a policy violation has occurred, consideration is given to whether the prohibited conduct forms a pattern, is sufficiently serious, pervasive or persistent as to create an intimidating, hostile, humiliating, demeaning, or sexually offensive working, academic, residential, or social environment under both a subjective and objective standard. A single isolated incident of sexual harassment may create a hostile environment if the incident is sufficiently severe. The more severe the conduct, the less need there is to show a pattern or a repetitive series of incidents.

Sexual or Gender Based Discrimination:

This prohibited conduct includes any distinction, preference, advantage for, detriment to, or adverse treatment of an individual compared to others that is based on that individual’s actual or perceived gender, gender identity, genetic information, marital status, pregnancy, sex or sexual preference. This policy covers sexual and gender based discrimination in employment and in access to educational opportunities. Discrimination against any employee, applicant for employment, student or applicant for admission is prohibited.

Sexual and Gender Based Harassment:

This prohibited conduct includes any unwelcome sexual advance, request for sexual favors, or other unwelcome verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when (1) submission to or rejection of such conduct is made, either explicitly or implicitly, a term or condition of an individual’s employment, evaluation of academic work, or participation in any aspect of a University program or activity; or (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as a basis for decisions affecting the individual; or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work or academic performance. This also includes gender-based harassment, which may include acts of verbal, non-verbal, or physical aggression, intimidation, or hostility based on gender or gender stereotyping, even if those acts do not involve conduct of a sexual nature.

Sexual Assault:

This prohibited conduct includes having or attempting to have sexual intercourse, or to engage in other forms of sexual activity such as inappropriate touching, with another individual (1) by force or threat of force; (2) without consent; or (3) where the individual is incapacitated and lacks capacity to give affirmative consent. Sexual intercourse includes vaginal or anal penetration, however slight, with a body part (e.g. penis, tongue, finger, hand) or object, or oral penetration involving mouth to genital contact.

Non-Consensual Sexual Contact:

This prohibited conduct includes having sexual or intimate or socially unacceptable contact with another individual (1) without affirmative consent; (2) by force or by threat of force; and / or (3) when that individual is incapacitated and lacks capacity to give affirmative consent. For example, sexual contact includes, but is not limited to, touching the intimate parts of another, causing another to touch one’s intimate parts, exposing another without consent, or other contact of a sexual or intimate nature. Intimate parts may include the breasts, genitals, buttocks, groin, mouth, legs, back, or any other part of the body that is touched in a sexual manner.

Sexual Exploitation:

This prohibited conduct includes taking non-consensual or abusive sexual advantage of another for one’s own advantage or benefit, or to benefit anyone other than the one being exploited. Examples of sexual exploitation include, but are not limited to: (1) surreptitiously observing another individual’s nudity or sexual activity or allowing another to observe consensual sexual activity without the knowledge and consent of all parties involved; (2) non-consensual sharing or streaming of images, photography, video, or audio recording of sexual activity or nudity, or distribution of such without the knowledge and consent of all parties involved; (3) exposing one’s genitals or inducing another to expose their own genitals in non-consensual circumstances; (4) knowingly exposing another individual to a sexually transmitted disease or virus without their knowledge; (5) sexually-based bullying; or (6) inducing incapacitation for the purpose of making another person vulnerable to non-consensual sexual activity.

Stalking:

This prohibited conduct includes physical or verbal conduct (generally demonstrated by two or more events) directed at another individual in a manner that could be reasonably regarded as likely to alarm, intimidate, control, coerce, harass, cause fear of harm or injury to that person or to a third party. The feared harm or injury may be physical, emotional, psychological, or related to the personal safety, property, education, or employment of the individual. For example, failure to comply with a no contact order may be construed as stalking behavior.

Cyber-Stalking:

This prohibited conduct is stalking through the use of electronic media such as the Internet, social networks, blogs, cell phones, texts, or other similar devices or forms of contact are used as the manner of contact.

Intimate Partner Violence:

This prohibited conduct includes violence towards an intimate partner (also known as dating violence, domestic violence or relationship violence) which includes any act of violence or threatened act of violence against a person who is, or has been, involved in a sexual, dating, domestic or other intimate relationship with the responding party. Intimate partner violence can encompass a broad range of behavior including, but not limited to, physical violence, sexual violence, emotional violence, and economic abuse. It may involve one act or an ongoing pattern of behavior. Intimate partner violence may take the form of threats, assault, property damage, violence or threat of violence to one’s self, one’s sexual or romantic partner, or to the family members or friends of the sexual or romantic partner. Sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, harm to others, stalking, and retaliation may all be forms of intimate partner violence.

Retaliation:

This prohibited conduct includes actions, behaviors, words, or attempts to take adverse action against the reporting party, responding party, or any individual or group of individuals because of their good faith participation in an investigation or resolution of an allegation of prohibited conduct. Retaliation can be committed by an individual or group of individuals, including, but not limited to a reporting party or responding party. Retaliation can take many forms, including threats, harassment, intimidation, pressuring, continued abuse, violence, or other forms of harm to others. A difference of opinion and/or dislike of another person’s good faith decision does not constitute retaliation. Retaliation has significant potential to interfere with a person’s ability to file a report or participate in an investigation, and to interfere with or limit the University’s ability to investigate, stop, prevent and remedy allegations of prohibited conduct. Any allegations of retaliation will be assessed and promptly investigated.

Prohibited Relationships by Persons in Authority:

This prohibited conduct includes sexual or other intimate relationships between persons occupying asymmetrical positions of power (or perceived positions of power). Even when both consent, such relationships violate the standards of professional conduct. Romantic or sexual relationships between individuals in unequal positions may be less consensual than perceived by the individual whose position confers power. Therefore, relationships in which one party maintains a direct supervisory or evaluative role over another party are prohibited. In general, this includes all sexual or other intimate relationships between students and their employers, supervisors, professors, coaches, advisors, or other non-student University personnel. Similarly, University employees who supervise or otherwise hold positions of authority over others are prohibited from having a sexual or other intimate relationship with an individual under their direct supervision. The effect of such a relationship may render an individual’s work, academic, or social environment intimidating, offensive, or hostile. Persons with direct supervisory, evaluative or coaching responsibilities who contemplate beginning or are involved in such relationships are required to promptly (1) discontinue any supervising role or relationship over the person; and (2) report the circumstances to their direct supervisor. This includes Resident Advisors, Community Advisors and students over whom they have direct responsibility.

Responsible Employees

Responsible Employees:

The term responsible employee refers to (1) any employee who has the authority to take action to redress the prohibited conduct; (2) any employee who has the duty to officially report prohibited conduct by students or employees; or (3) any employee a student could reasonably believe has the authority or responsibility to take action (such as a member of staff or faculty).

A responsible employee has a duty to report a violation or suspected violation to the Title IX office.  If you have any questions about your reporting obligation, please contact the Title IX Office at 906-635-2213.

Reporting Prohibited Conduct

Lake Superior State University Reporting Party Bill of Rights

As a reporting party in a Title IX report, you have the right:

  • To be treated with respect, dignity, and sensitivity throughout the investigation process.
  • To be informed of all available resources and how to access these resources.
  • To an advisor of your choosing for support through the investigation and/or appeal process.
  • To be informed of the University’s Gender Based Discrimination and Sexual Misconduct Policy.
  • To privacy under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The college will make all reasonable efforts to ensure the preservation of privacy, restricting information to those with a legitimate need to know
  •  To a prompt and thorough investigation of the allegations.
  • To participate or decline to participate in the investigation process. However, an investigation may still occur and decisions made on the available information
  •  To an outcome based solely on information gathered during the investigation. Such information shall be credible, relevant, based in fact, and without prejudice.
  •  To not have irrelevant prior sexual history considered as information in the investigation.
  •  To be notified in writing of the outcome of the investigation and any remedies and/or sanctions that have been issued.
  •  To request an appeal of the Title IX Coordinator’s decision and/or sanctions issued.
  • To a University response to any retaliation or harassment you experience based on your involvement in an investigation.