Wilkes Middle States collection
Collection
Identifier: 23-01
Dates
- 1949-present
Access
Full permission access is available to
Office of Institutional Research
The President’s Office
The Provost’s Office
Research access will be available to other administrative departments on a case by case basis, such as Academic Affairs, Student Affairs & Student Success, Admissions Office, the Finance Office, Bursar, Student Financial Services, etc.
Research access will be available to other administrative departments on a case by case basis, such as Academic Affairs, Student Affairs & Student Success, Admissions Office, the Finance Office, Bursar, Student Financial Services, etc.
Extent
28 boxes
Language of Materials
English
Provenance
It is uncertain who donated these materials to the archives but it is likely that a variety of administrative and academic departments transferred the materials to the archives from the 2000s to present. Librarian Elizabeth Sullivan kept accession records that indicate some of the financial and academic materials were transferred by Paul Adams and John Stachacz in 2013.
Acquisition:
The Middle States files have been transferred from all over campus, specifically the President's Office, Institutional Research department, and other administrative offices and brought over by Dr. Cox in the early 2000s through 2010s. Librarian Elizabeth Sullivan indicated that these files were officially transferred in 2013 by various parties such as Paul Adams, John Stachacz, and other administrators. Some of the materials were basic processed by Suzanna Calev in 2018-2020, and eventually fully processed by Jessica Van Orden in Fall 2026.
Historical Sketch of Wilkes' Middle States collection:
The Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) accreditation process is a recurring eight-year cycle, prior to September 1, 2018 a ten-year cycle, of institutional academic evaluation and peer review designed to ensure educational quality and grant an institution their accreditation. The process was started in 1919 with the formal formation of its first commission. Wilkes University was first granted accreditation in 1937 as Bucknell University Junior college and would later include its designation from Wilkes College to Wilkes University in 1990. In this process, participating institutions form multiple campus-wide committees to inspect its operations, gather data, and appraise their overall institutional effectiveness in order to create a Self-Study Report. This report is the foundation of the accreditation process, heavily structured around demonstrating the institution’s compliance with MSCHE’s core Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation, which consider aspects such as the college’s mission, student learning outcomes, support services, and governance.
The seven MSCHE Standards for Accreditation are the same core criteria that every institution must demonstrate in their report:
Standard I: Mission and Goals requires an institution to have a clearly defined mission and achievable goals guiding its operations, reflect its character, and focus on student outcomes.
“The institution’s mission defines its purpose within the context of higher education, the students it serves, and what it intends to accomplish. The institution’s stated goals are clearly linked to its mission and specify how the institution fulfills its mission.”
Standard II: Ethics and Integrity requires that the college conduct all operations with honesty, fairness, and transparency, specifically concerning its marketing, human resources departments, and treatment of students.
“Ethics and integrity are central, indispensable, and defining hallmarks of effective higher education institutions. In all activities, whether internal or external, an institution must be faithful to its mission, honor its contracts and commitments, adhere to its policies, and represent itself truthfully.”
Standard III: Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience focuses on the curriculum, assessing the college’s degree programs and ensuring that they are rigorous, coherent, and taught by qualified faculty.
“An institution provides students with learning experiences that are characterized by rigor and coherence at all program, certificate, and degree levels, regardless of instructional modality. All learning experiences, regardless of modality, program pace/schedule, level, and setting are consistent with higher education expectations.”
Standard IV: Support of the Student Experience considers the institution’s student services, looking at how effectively they recruit, admit, advise, and retain students in their success.
“Across all educational experiences, settings, levels, and instructional modalities, the institution recruits and admits students whose interests, abilities, experiences, and goals are congruent with its mission and educational offerings. The institution commits to student retention, persistence, completion, and success through a coherent and effective support system sustained by qualified professionals, which enhances the quality of the learning environment, contributes to the educational experience, and fosters student success.”
Standard V: Educational Effectiveness Assessment requires the institution to show their successes by regular testing and measure of what students have learned and using that data to improve teaching methods.
“Assessment of student learning and achievement demonstrates that the institution’s students have accomplished educational goals consistent with their program of study, degree level, the institution’s mission, and appropriate expectations for institutions of higher education.”
Standard VI: Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement focuses on the institution’s financial health and physical infrastructure, ensuring that their resources are directly tied to strategic planning and long-term stability.
“The institution’s planning processes, resources, and structures are aligned with each other and are sufficient to fulfill its mission and goals, to continuously assess and improve its programs and services, and to respond effectively to opportunities and challenges.”
Standard VII: Governance, Leadership, and Administration ensures the institution’s transparent, effective leadership structures, including independent governing boards and qualified administrators.
“The institution is governed and administered in a manner that allows it to realize its stated mission and goals in a way that effectively benefits the institution, its students, and the other constituencies it serves. Even when supported by or affiliated with a related entity, the institution has education as its primary purpose, and it operates as an academic institution with appropriate autonomy.”
With this report complete, a visiting team of peer evaluators from other institutions is invited to the campus so they may interview faculty, staff, and students to verify the findings in their own Report of the Visiting Team. After this stage, a final, formal review is conducted by the Commission, which considers the institution’s self-study report alongside the peer review recommendations of the visiting team to officially reaffirm the accreditation status of said institution and ensure their continued commitment to improvement.
Other than the Self-Study Report, there are two other reports pertaining to the accreditation process:
The Periodic Review Report is an interim, milestone report that is designed to provide retrospective, current, and prospective institutional data that proves its continued meeting of the standards, as well as the financial and operational stability between the official self-studies submitted each eight year cycle. These were typically submitted at a five year interval during the ten year cycle process. This report was renamed the “Mid-Point Review,” during the transition in 2018 to an eight-year cycle, but has since been removed as a requirement for accreditation by the MSCHE in 2023.
The Follow-up Report is a report requested by the Commission to address particular areas of concern, potential non-compliance, or recommendations with targeted data.These reports are given with a strict deadline by the Commission and are meant to prove that the institution has worked to correct the specific highlighted deficiencies.
Series I: 1937 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, earliest-1937, is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series II: 1950 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1949 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series III: 1960 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1955-1960 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series IV: 1970 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1961-1970 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series V: 1980 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1971-1980 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VI: 1990 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1982-1990 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VII: 2000 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1991-2000 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VIII: 2010 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 2001-2010 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series IX: 2020 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 2012-2020 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
The seven MSCHE Standards for Accreditation are the same core criteria that every institution must demonstrate in their report:
Standard I: Mission and Goals requires an institution to have a clearly defined mission and achievable goals guiding its operations, reflect its character, and focus on student outcomes.
“The institution’s mission defines its purpose within the context of higher education, the students it serves, and what it intends to accomplish. The institution’s stated goals are clearly linked to its mission and specify how the institution fulfills its mission.”
Standard II: Ethics and Integrity requires that the college conduct all operations with honesty, fairness, and transparency, specifically concerning its marketing, human resources departments, and treatment of students.
“Ethics and integrity are central, indispensable, and defining hallmarks of effective higher education institutions. In all activities, whether internal or external, an institution must be faithful to its mission, honor its contracts and commitments, adhere to its policies, and represent itself truthfully.”
Standard III: Design and Delivery of the Student Learning Experience focuses on the curriculum, assessing the college’s degree programs and ensuring that they are rigorous, coherent, and taught by qualified faculty.
“An institution provides students with learning experiences that are characterized by rigor and coherence at all program, certificate, and degree levels, regardless of instructional modality. All learning experiences, regardless of modality, program pace/schedule, level, and setting are consistent with higher education expectations.”
Standard IV: Support of the Student Experience considers the institution’s student services, looking at how effectively they recruit, admit, advise, and retain students in their success.
“Across all educational experiences, settings, levels, and instructional modalities, the institution recruits and admits students whose interests, abilities, experiences, and goals are congruent with its mission and educational offerings. The institution commits to student retention, persistence, completion, and success through a coherent and effective support system sustained by qualified professionals, which enhances the quality of the learning environment, contributes to the educational experience, and fosters student success.”
Standard V: Educational Effectiveness Assessment requires the institution to show their successes by regular testing and measure of what students have learned and using that data to improve teaching methods.
“Assessment of student learning and achievement demonstrates that the institution’s students have accomplished educational goals consistent with their program of study, degree level, the institution’s mission, and appropriate expectations for institutions of higher education.”
Standard VI: Planning, Resources, and Institutional Improvement focuses on the institution’s financial health and physical infrastructure, ensuring that their resources are directly tied to strategic planning and long-term stability.
“The institution’s planning processes, resources, and structures are aligned with each other and are sufficient to fulfill its mission and goals, to continuously assess and improve its programs and services, and to respond effectively to opportunities and challenges.”
Standard VII: Governance, Leadership, and Administration ensures the institution’s transparent, effective leadership structures, including independent governing boards and qualified administrators.
“The institution is governed and administered in a manner that allows it to realize its stated mission and goals in a way that effectively benefits the institution, its students, and the other constituencies it serves. Even when supported by or affiliated with a related entity, the institution has education as its primary purpose, and it operates as an academic institution with appropriate autonomy.”
With this report complete, a visiting team of peer evaluators from other institutions is invited to the campus so they may interview faculty, staff, and students to verify the findings in their own Report of the Visiting Team. After this stage, a final, formal review is conducted by the Commission, which considers the institution’s self-study report alongside the peer review recommendations of the visiting team to officially reaffirm the accreditation status of said institution and ensure their continued commitment to improvement.
Other than the Self-Study Report, there are two other reports pertaining to the accreditation process:
The Periodic Review Report is an interim, milestone report that is designed to provide retrospective, current, and prospective institutional data that proves its continued meeting of the standards, as well as the financial and operational stability between the official self-studies submitted each eight year cycle. These were typically submitted at a five year interval during the ten year cycle process. This report was renamed the “Mid-Point Review,” during the transition in 2018 to an eight-year cycle, but has since been removed as a requirement for accreditation by the MSCHE in 2023.
The Follow-up Report is a report requested by the Commission to address particular areas of concern, potential non-compliance, or recommendations with targeted data.These reports are given with a strict deadline by the Commission and are meant to prove that the institution has worked to correct the specific highlighted deficiencies.
Series I: 1937 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, earliest-1937, is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series II: 1950 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1949 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series III: 1960 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1955-1960 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series IV: 1970 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1961-1970 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series V: 1980 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1971-1980 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VI: 1990 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1982-1990 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VII: 2000 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 1991-2000 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series VIII: 2010 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 2001-2010 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
Series IX: 2020 Cycle, Middle States Review Report, 2012-2020 is arranged chronologically, and contains a variety of documents contributing to the accreditation cycle, including letters and correspondence, meeting minutes, data reports, presentation aides, survey results, visiting team reports, enrollment statistics, faculty and department statistics, faculty responses to various reports, working group notes, and more.
- Language of description
- No linguistic content; Not applicable
- Script of description
- Code for uncoded script
Repository Details
Part of the Wilkes University Archives Repository
Contact:
84 W South St.
Wilkes-Barre PA 18701 US
570-408-2000
570-408-7823 (Fax)
ask.archives@wilkes.edu
84 W South St.
Wilkes-Barre PA 18701 US
570-408-2000
570-408-7823 (Fax)
ask.archives@wilkes.edu