Criterion Committees Role

  • Gather evidence and write an evaluative response to the HLC’s Five Criteria statements addressing each component and providing patterns of evidence.

Roles within Criterion Committees

  • Chair: Coordinate, schedule and facilitate criterion committee meetings. Keep criterion committee on schedule, ensuring deadlines are met. Notify operational committee when draft is ready for review.
  • Argument Editor: Review committee drafts. Validate that the statements address all criteria components. Validate that evidence supports the statements. Notify evidence coordinator if evidence is missing. Notify chair when draft is ready for review.
  • Evidence Coordinator: Work with committee to locate needed evidence.  Ensure evidence tags (URLs and document names) within argument are clearly noted and all referenced documents are in Box evidence folder.
  • All members: Contribute as subject matter experts, locating evidence, writing and reviewing the argument.

Operational Committee Role

  • Membership comprises representatives from WashU IT, Olin Library, Office of Public Affairs and Office of the Provost, with support from Institutional Research.
  • Provide key institutional data.
  • Provide processes for collection of data. Provide support and infrastructure to the accreditation process.

Criterion One: Mission

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

Committee Members

  • Chair: Kit Wellmon, professor of philosophy in Arts & Sciences
  • Argument Editor: Julie Kennedy, senior content editor in public affairs
  • Evidence Coordinator: Ebba Segerberg, director of communications in Arts & Sciences
  • Consultant to Committee: Legail Poole Chandler, vice chancellor for human resources
  • Emelyn dela Peña, associate vice chancellor for student affairs and dean of the Center for Diversity and Inclusion
  • Diana Hill Mitchell, associate dean of the graduate school in Arts & Sciences
  • Steve Givens, associate vice chancellor and chief of staff in the Office of the Chancellor
  • Tim McBride, professor of public health in the Brown School
  • Ronné Turner, vice provost of admissions

Criterion Two: Integrity – Ethical and Responsible Conduct

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

Committee Members

  • Chair: Tamara King, associate vice chancellor for student support and wellness
  • Argument Editor: Sean McWilliams, assistant dean and academic coordinator in the College of Arts & Sciences
  • Evidence Coordinator: Michael Runiewicz, director of Student Financial Services
  • Consultant to Committee: Bill Tate, dean of the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, vice provost for graduate education and Edward Mallinckrodt Distinguished University Professor in Arts & Sciences
  • Consultant to Committee: Lisa Wiland, director of institutional research and analysis
  • Jeneane Braden, interim assistant vice chancellor for research integrity & ethics
  • Emelyn dela Peña, associate vice chancellor for student affairs and dean of the Center for Diversity and Inclusion
  • Sue Hosack, university registrar
  • Jessica Kennedy, Title IX coordinator
  • Tim Moore, John and Penelope Biggs Distinguished Professor of Classics and director of undergraduate studies in the Department of Classics in Arts & Sciences
  • Legail Poole Chandler, vice chancellor for human resources
  • Sheri Notaro, associate dean of the Graduate School
  • Julie Shimabukuro, director of admissions
  • Rob Wild, associate vice chancellor for student affairs and dean of students

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

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

Committee Members

  • Chair: Dirk Killen, associate dean in the College of Arts & Sciences
  • Argument Editor: Joy Kiefer, director of the Office of Undergraduate Research and associate dean in Arts & Sciences
  • Evidence Coordinator: Lisa Kuehne, math programs coordinator for Cornerstone
  • Consultant to Committee: Jennifer Smith, dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, professor of Earth & Planetary Science​s
  • Brian Carpenter, professor of psychological & brain sciences in Arts & Sciences
  • Jonathan Cohen, assistant dean, administration in Arts & Sciences
  • Ron Cytron, professor and associate chair of computer science and engineering in the School of Engineering and Applied Science
  • Katharine Pei, director of the First Year Center
  • Beth Fisher, director of academic services in The Teaching Center
  • Kristine Helbling, subject librarian and instruction coordinator in Olin Library

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.

Committee Members

  • Chair: Heidi Kolk, associate director of American Culture Studies in Arts & Sciences, assistant director of assessment
  • Argument Editor: Tim Bono, assistant dean for assessment and analytics, and a lecturer in psychological & brain sciences in Arts & Sciences
  • Evidence Coordinator: Susan Lowther, special programs coordinator for The Writing Center
  • Consultant to Committee: Jennifer Smith, dean of the College of Arts & Sciences, professor of Earth & Planetary Science​s
  • Rebecca Copeland, professor of Japanese language and literature and chair of the Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures in Arts & Sciences
  • Harvey Fields, assistant dean for student success
  • Maggie Konich, ​director, Arts & Sciences data analysis
  • Randy Larsen, William R. Stuckenberg Professor of Human Values and Moral Development in Arts & Sciences
  • Mark McDaniel, professor of psychology in Arts & Sciences
  • Jennifer Romney, associate dean in the College of Arts & Sciences
  • Jay Turner, associate professor of energy, environmental and chemical engineering in the School of Engineering & Applied Science

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.

Committee Members

  • Co-Chair: Amy Kweskin, vice chancellor for finance and chief financial officer
  • Co-Chair: Tim Thornton, assistant vice chancellor for finance and director of financial planning & analysis
  • Argument Editor: Erin Schuettpelz, associate provost for operations
  • Evidence Coordinator: Bob Buer, assistant vice chancellor for human resources
  • Consultant to Committee: Legail Poole Chandler, vice chancellor for human resources
  • Denise Hirschbeck, assistant vice chancellor in WashU IT
  • Brent Jenson, senior associate dean of finance in Olin Business School
  • Jamie Kolker, university architect and associate vice chancellor
  • Larry Kuykendall, associate dean of finance and administration in Arts & Sciences
  • Lynn McCloskey, assistant provost, analysis
  • Jill Totten, associate dean for administration and finance in the School of Engineering & Applied Science
  • Lori White, vice chancellor for student affairs

Operational Support Committee Members

  • Chair: Pat Kogos, business analyst III in WashU IT
  • Becky Cowin, technical training specialist in WashU IT
  • Jill Edwards, senior project manager, university accreditation in the Office of the Provost
  • Barry Goldstein, business analyst IV in WashU IT
  • Teresa Lane, director of digital content strategy in public affairs
  • Carol Mollman, assessment coordinator in Olin Library
  • Ryan Rhea, senior editor in public affairs