THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

 

TO:	Committee on Higher Education and Professional Practice
FROM:	Johanna Duncan-Poitier
SUBJECT:	Proposed Amendment to the Rules of the Board of Regents Relating to Voluntary Institutional Accreditation for Title IV Purposes
DATE:	January 23, 2007
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goal 2
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

SUMMARY

 

Issue for Decision

 

Should the Board of Regents amend Subpart 4-1 of the Rules of the Board of Regents relating to voluntary institutional accreditation for Title IV purposes?

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

Review of Policy.

 

Proposed Handling

 

The question will come before the Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee at its February 2007 meeting, where it will be voted on and action taken.  It will then come before the full Board at its February 2007 meeting for final action.

 

Procedural History

 

In June 2001, the Board of Regents adopted Part 4 of the Rules of the Board of Regents, Voluntary Institutional Accreditation for Title IV Purposes (now Subpart 4-1), as part of a process of complying with the requirements in regulations of the U.S. Department of Education (34 CFR Part 602) for continued recognition of the Board of Regents as an institutional accrediting agency.  One of the federal regulations requires each Nationally Recognized Accrediting Agency to have “a systematic program of review that demonstrates that its standards are adequate to evaluate the quality of the education or training provided by the institutions and programs it accredits and relevant to the educational or training needs of students.” (34 CFR 602.21[a])

 

In compliance with the federal requirement, upon adoption of Subpart 4-1, the Department began a multi-year review of the institutional accreditation standards and procedures.  The review included examination of the standards of other accrediting agencies; surveys of accredited institutions and of New York higher education institutions accredited by other agencies; annual colloquia on selected standards involving faculty and administrators from accredited institutions and other New York degree-granting institutions, members of the Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation, and Department accreditation staff; review of the findings of peer review teams in site visits for institutional accreditation; extended discussions by the Regents Advisory Council; and review by the Office of Counsel.  The changes proposed are an outcome of that multi-year process.  

 

On October 27, 2006, the Regents Advisory Council unanimously recommended these proposed changes to the Board of Regents.

 

The proposed amendment was discussed at the December 2006 meeting.  Notice of Proposed Rule Making concerning the proposed amendment was published in the State Register on November 29, 2006.  An Assessment of Public Comment is attached.  Supporting materials are available on request from the Office of the Board of Regents.

 

Background Information

 

Every accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education carries out self-studies of its accreditation standards.  Self-studies are the best way to ensure that the accreditation standards are assuring the quality of the institutions accredited and that the accredited institutions are honestly complying with such standards.  Self-study is the same kind of process that the Statewide Plan’s Priority A1 asked all colleges and universities to undergo; i.e., to “describe in their master plans how the results of their ongoing self-study processes improve the quality of students’ education.”

 

In response to the surveys of accredited institutions and of New York higher education institutions accredited by other agencies, the Department found high levels of assent to the Regents institutional accreditation standards, especially those regarding program length, credit, and other requirements for degrees; faculty competence and credentials; and consumer information in catalogs.  The annual colloquia that included faculty and administrators from accredited institutions and other New York degree-granting institutions, members of the Regents Advisory Council on Institutional Accreditation and Department staff, also advised against accreditation standards that are too specific or quantifiable.  The annual colloquia urged that the standards should focus on student success, however, the presence of several institutions with major research missions led to caveats being expressed about emphasizing that focus exclusively.

 

Of the 20 institutions the Board accredits, 14 (70 percent) are independent and 6 (30 percent), proprietary.  They are listed in the table below.  Forty percent (eight institutions) do not enroll undergraduates, including such major research institutions as Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and Rockefeller University, seminaries like Northeastern Seminary, and specialized institutions like the New York Academy of Art and Sunbridge College.  Two of the applicants for accreditation are graduate institutions: Christie’s Education and the Gerstner Graduate School, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

 

 

The Department and the Regents Advisory Council have taken into consideration the advice gathered through the self-study.  The accreditation requirements focus on outcomes, not procedures.  They do not prescribe what an accredited institution must do, just what it must accomplish.  They expect each institution to demonstrate how it meets the standards in terms of its mission.  What is proposed, as a result of the self-study, is a clarification of certain standards where there was some question about what was expected, a strengthening of standards, and the addition of standards to close some gaps in the array.  For example:

 

·        In response to questions about on-line research resources, the amendments would clarify the standard, requiring each institution to maintain a library that supports its mission and registered programs, by specifying that the collections should include both print and non-print resources.

 

·        To clarify the standard requiring an institution to offer appropriate academic support services, wherever and whenever it offers courses from a registered program.  The amendments would specify that an institution enrolling under-prepared students shall provide sufficient supplementary services to enable them to make satisfactory progress toward completion of their programs.

 

·        In response to concerns about the rigor of the current standards about undergraduate graduation rates, these amendments require that every institution with a rate of five or more percentage points lower than the statewide average submit a plan to improve its graduation rates for the Commissioner’s approval.  This requirement replaces the current standard that allows an institution to avoid submitting such a plan if it makes at least a three percent annual improvement in its undergraduate graduation rates.

 

·        In response to a gap in the standards identified by the self-study, a new standard would specify that faculty teaching in undergraduate programs will be expected to hold at least a master’s degree related to the subject taught or the institution must demonstrate the faculty member’s special competence in that field (such as extensive practical experience).  This is similar to the existing standard for faculty in graduate programs; requiring such faculty to hold doctorates or equivalent expertise.

 

            These standards do not now exist in the program registration standards.  The accreditation standards are more comprehensive and provide greater assurance of quality than the registration standards.  Application of these standards to some seven and a half percent of the institutions in the State helps keep the Department apprized of developments in the field and the best thinking of the experts used as peer reviewers on site visits.

 

During the public comment period a CUNY college said that the proposed amendment “will require greater accountability for all regents-accredited institutions of higher education without exception.”  A proprietary college accredited by a different agency stated that “[t]he elevation of accrediting standards embodied in the proposed amendments is such that it renders the Board of Regents as an accrediting body on a par with regional accreditation bodies, including Middle States.”

 

In other correspondence, New York higher education institutions have said that they accept accreditation by the Board of Regents:

 

The New York State Board of Regents’ current accreditation standards, policies, and procedures are readily supported by New York University.  From my experiences as a Dean of a major graduate program, the standards of accreditation of the Board of Regents serve as the framework for accepting students in transfer from institutions accredited by the Regents.  The Regents’ decisions to grant or deny accreditation to colleges and universities in New York State continue to be widely accepted [New York University, School of Medicine].

 

“In recognizing the accreditation of the Board of Regents, the College has been accepting students in transfer from institutions accredited by the Regents.  The Regents’ decisions to grant or deny accreditation to colleges and universities in New York State continue to be widely accepted [Hartwick College].”

 

“The College has long ascertained that accreditation standards, policies, and procedures by the Board are equal if not more rigorous than Regional Accrediting Organizations [North Country Community College].”

 

“Without exception, I have found that these institutions, if they grant associate degrees, have graduation rates that match or exceed the graduation rates of public community colleges.  As an administrator at a public community college I have been impressed with the student success efforts and retention initiatives underway at these institutions.  I have found also that the accredited institutions have job placement rates that exceed those of many public and private colleges [Dutchess Community College].”

 

Recommendation

 

            It is recommended that the Board of Regents take the following action:

 

            VOTED:  That Subpart 4-1 of the Rules of the Board of Regents be amended, as submitted, effective March 8, 2007.

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

The effective date of the proposed amendment is March 8, 2007.

 

Attachment

 

 

 

 

AMENDMENT TO THE RULES OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS

Pursuant to sections 207, 210, 214, 215 and 305 of the Education Law.

Subpart 4-1 of the Rules of the Board of Regents is amended, effective March 8, 2007, as follows:

                                                SUBPART 4-1  

VOLUNTARY INSTITUTIONAL ACCREDITATION FOR TITLE IV PURPOSES   

4-1.1 .  .  .

4-1.2  Definitions.  As used in this Subpart:

(a) . . .

(b) .  .  .

(c) Accreditation with conditions means accreditation that requires the institution to [provide reports and/or submit to site visits concerning] take steps to remedy issues raised in a review for accreditation, and provide reports and/or submit to site visits concerning such issues, provided that such issues do not materially affect the institution's substantial compliance with the standards and requirements for accreditation.

(d) .  .  .

(e) .  .  .

(f)  .  .  .

(g) .  .  .

(h)  Certificate means a credential issued by an institution in recognition of the completion of a registered curriculum other than one leading to a degree.

(i) .  .  .

(j)  Curriculum or program or program of study means the formal educational requirements necessary to qualify for certificates or degrees.

(k) .  .  .

(l) .  .  .

(m) .  .  .

(n) .  .  .

(o) .  .  .

(p) .  .  .

(q) .  .  .

(r) .  .  .

(s) .  .  .

(t) .  .  .

(u) .  .  .

(v) .  .  .

4-1.3   General requirements and provisions.

(a) .  .  .

(b) Duration of accreditation.  Accreditation shall be for a term of 10 years unless otherwise limited to a lesser period for good cause as determined by the commissioner and the Board of Regents, based upon a review conducted pursuant to this Subpart.  The term of accreditation may be extended by the commissioner on one or more occasions for a period not to exceed 12 months on each occasion for good cause as determined by the commissioner, including but not limited to inability to conduct site visits because of unforeseen events and the department's plan to coordinate a site visit with a site visit by another accrediting agency.

(c)  Scope of accreditation.  The institution's accreditation shall include the principal center, branch campuses and additional locations that exist at the time accreditation is granted, unless otherwise limited. Such accreditation shall not include substantive changes, as defined in section [4-1.5 (e)] 4-1.5(d) of this Subpart, made after accreditation is granted. Accreditation action is required to include each such substantive change, as prescribed in section [4-1.5(e)] 4-1.5(d) of this Subpart.

(d) .  .  .

            [(e) .  .  .]

            (e) Use of information. 

             (1) Information obtained by the department pursuant to an institutional accreditation review may be used by the department for State actions, including but not limited to program registration actions as prescribed in Part 52 of this Title. 

            (2) Information obtained by the department in relation to such State actions may be used by the department for purposes of institutional accreditation.

            (3) Information provided to the department by the secretary concerning the institution's compliance with its HEA title IV program responsibilities, including but not limited to annual student default rate data, financial or compliance audits conducted annually by the secretary, and program reviews conducted periodically by the secretary, shall be a consideration in a review for accreditation or renewal of accreditation, or in an enforcement review.

(f) Reporting requirements. 

(1)  Unless prior approval by the department is otherwise required by this Title, the institution shall notify the department of any substantive change, as defined in section [4-1.5(e)] 4-1.5(d) of this Subpart, in its operation within 72 hours after such change.

(2) .  .  .

(3) .  .  .

(4) .  .  .

(g) .  .  .

4-1.4  Standards of quality for institutional accreditation. 

(a)  Institutional mission.   The institution shall have a clear statement of purpose, mission, and goals that shall be reflected in the policies, practices, and outcomes of the institution.  The statement of mission may include but need not be limited to: the academic purposes of the institution and the institution's commitment to the social and economic context in which the institution operates; the relative roles of teaching, creation and preservation of knowledge, and service; the nature of constituents to be served; and the basis for setting priorities.

(b) Assessment of student achievement. 

(1)  The institution shall prepare and [continuously] implement a plan for the systematic assessment of its effectiveness in promoting the quality of student achievement and development.  [Such] The assessment plan shall include but need not be limited to: graduation rates, retention rates and, as pertinent to institutional mission and programs, State licensing examination results and job placement rates. The plan may include other information important to the institution's achievement of its mission, such as transfer rates and the subsequent educational success of its graduates.  The institution shall provide to the department on request and in all applications for accreditation and renewal of accreditation, evidence of its implementation of the plan and its effects on the quality of student achievement in relation to its mission and goals.

(2) .  .  .

(3)  (i)  Graduation rates.

(a)  Associate degrees. If, in the judgement of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution awarding associate degrees that reports an associate degree completion rate more than five percentage points below the mean associate degree completion rate reported by all institutions in the State, according to the most recent information available to the department[, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent], shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement [in terms of] as measured by graduation rates.  Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines [intended] to achieve [at least the mean or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years] a completion rate not lower than five percentage points below the mean.  Such plan shall be submitted to, and subject to approval by, the commissioner.

(b)  Baccalaureate degrees. If, in the judgement of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution awarding baccalaureate degrees that reports a baccalaureate degree completion rate more than five percentage points below the mean baccalaureate degree completion rate reported by all institutions in the State, according to the most recent information available to the department[, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent], shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement [in terms of] as measured by graduation rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines [intended] to achieve [at least the mean or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years] a completion rate not lower than five percentage points below the mean.  Such plan shall be submitted to, and subject to approval by, the commissioner.

 (ii)  Job placement rates. 

(a)  Two-year colleges. If, in the judgement of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution whose mission includes the preparation of students for employment and that offers no programs beyond the associate degree that reports job placement rates, including placement in civilian and military occupations, more than five percentage points below the mean reported by all institutions in the State offering programs no higher than the associate degree level, according to the most recent information available to the department[, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent], shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement [in terms of] as measured by job placement rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines [intended] to achieve [at least the mean or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years] a job placement rate not lower than five percentage points below the mean.  Such plan shall be submitted to, and subject to approval by, the commissioner.

(b)  Four-year colleges. If, in the judgement of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution whose mission includes the preparation of students for employment and that offers programs at and above the baccalaureate degree that reports job placement rates, including civilian and military occupations, below 80 percent[, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent], shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement [in terms of] as measured by job placement rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines [intended] to achieve at least an 80 percent [or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years] job placement rate.  Such plan shall be submitted to, and subject to approval by, the commissioner. 

(c)  Graduate-only institutions. If, in the judgement of the commissioner, there is a sufficient cohort of students, based on the most recent data submitted to the department, an institution whose mission includes the preparation of students for employment and that offers no programs below the master's degree that reports job placement rates, including civilian and military occupations, below 80 percent[, and that has not shown an improvement over the preceding year of at least three percent], shall prepare and submit a plan to improve student achievement [in terms of] as measured by job placement rates. Such plan shall include but need not be limited to: strategies and timelines [intended] to achieve at least an 80 percent [or a three-percent annual improvement within a period not to exceed two years at an institution where the longest program is at least two years duration, 18 months at an institution where the longest program is at least one year but less than two years in duration, or 12 months at an institution where the longest program is less than one year in duration]  job placement rate.  Such plan shall be submitted to, and subject to approval by, the commissioner. 

(c)[Curricula] Programs of study. 

(1) Integrity of credit.

(i)  Each course offered for credit by an institution shall be part of a general education requirement, a major requirement, or an elective in a [curriculum] program of study leading to a degree or certificate.

(ii) . . .

(iii) Learning objectives for each course shall be of a level and rigor that warrant acceptance in transfer by other institutions of higher education.

[(iii)] (iv) . . .  

(2) [Curricular] Program of study goals and objectives. 

(i) [Institutional] The goals and the objectives of each [curriculum and of all courses] program of study and the competencies expected of students completing the program shall be [carefully] clearly defined in writing.

(ii) Each [curriculum] program of study shall show evidence of careful planning. The content and duration of [curricula] programs of study shall be designed to implement their purposes.

(iii) Course [descriptions] syllabi shall clearly state the subject matter, the learning objectives, and requirements of each course and shall be provided to the students in the course.

(3) Assessment of success in achieving the goals and objectives. There shall be a written plan to assess, no less than every five [to seven] years, the [success] effectiveness of faculty and students in achieving [institutional] goals and [curricular] objectives and to promote improvement.  Such assessment shall include systematic collection, review and use of quantitative and qualitative information about [educational] programs of study, including [at least some] information that directly addresses learning outcomes, and shall [be undertaken for the purpose of improving] document actions taken to improve student learning and development.

(4) Program length, credit, and other requirements for degrees. For each [curriculum] program of study, the institution shall assure that courses will be offered with sufficient frequency to enable students to complete the program within the minimum time for degree completion for each degree level identified in this paragraph.

(i)  .  .  .

(ii)  .  .  .

(iii)  .  .  .

(iv)  .  .  .

(v)  .  .  .

(d)  Faculty. 

(1)  Competence and credentials.

(i)  [All] In support of the mission of the institution, all members of the faculty shall have demonstrated by training, earned degrees, scholarship, experience, and by classroom performance or other evidence of teaching potential, their competence to offer the courses and discharge the other academic responsibilities which are assigned to them.

(ii) Faculty members who teach in a program leading to a certificate or undergraduate degree shall hold at least a master's degree in the field in which they teach or a related field, or shall be actively pursuing graduate study in such field or related field, or shall have demonstrated, in other widely recognized ways, such as completion of relevant education, training and/or experience, their competence in the field in which they teach.   Upon request, institutions shall provide documentation to the commissioner confirming that faculty members who do not hold such master's degree or are not pursuing such graduate study have demonstrated competence in the field in which they teach.

[(ii)] (iii) At least one faculty member teaching in each [curriculum] program of study culminating in a [bachelor's] baccalaureate degree shall hold an earned doctorate in an appropriate field, unless the [department determines] commissioner deems that the [curriculum] program is in a field of study in which other standards are appropriate.

[(iii)] (iv) All faculty members who teach within a [curriculum] program of study leading to a graduate degree shall possess earned doctorates or other terminal degrees in the field in which they are teaching or shall have demonstrated, in other widely recognized ways, their special competence in the field in which they direct graduate students.   Upon request, institutions shall provide documentation to the commissioner confirming that the faculty members who do not hold such doctorate or terminal degrees have demonstrated special competence in the field in which they direct students.

(2)  Adequacy to support programs and services. 

(i) .  .  .

(ii) .  .  .

(iii) For each [curriculum] program of study the institution shall designate a body of faculty who, with the academic officers of the institution, shall be responsible for setting curricular objectives, for determining the means by which achievement of objectives is measured, for evaluating the achievement of curricular objectives, and for providing academic advice to students.

(iv) . . .

(3) Evaluation and professional responsibilities. 

(i) The teaching and research of each faculty member, in accordance with the faculty member's responsibilities, shall be evaluated periodically by the institution.  [The teaching of each inexperienced faculty member] Members of the instructional staff new to the institution shall receive special supervision during the initial period of appointment.

(ii) [Each] The institution shall ensure that each member of the faculty [shall be] is allowed adequate time, in accordance with the faculty member's responsibilities, to broaden professional knowledge, prepare course materials, advise students, direct independent study and research, supervise teaching, participate in institutional governance and carry out other academic responsibilities appropriate to his or her position, in addition to performing assigned teaching and administrative duties.

(e) Resources. 

(1) . . .

(2) Library and information resources. 

(i) The institution shall provide libraries that possess, [and] maintain, and provide access to print and non-print collections and technology sufficient in depth and breadth to support the mission of the institution and each [curriculum] program of study.

(ii) Libraries shall be administered by professionally trained staff supported by sufficient personnel. Library services and resources shall be available for student and faculty use with sufficient regularity and at appropriate hours [to] and shall support the mission of the institution and [the curricula it offers] its programs of study.

(iii)  The institution shall ensure that all students receive instruction in information literacy. 

(3) .  .  .

            (f)  Administration. 

(1)  Responsibilities.

            (i)  .  .  .

            (ii)  Within the authority of its governing [board] entity, the institution shall provide that overall educational policy and its implementation are the responsibility of the institution's faculty and academic officers.  Other appropriate segments of the institutional community may share in this responsibility in accordance with the norms developed by each institution.

            (iii) .  .  .

            (iv) .  .  .

            (v) The institution shall maintain for each student a permanent, complete, accurate, and up-to-date transcript of student achievement at the institution. This document will be the official cumulative record of the student's [cumulative] achievement. Copies shall be made available at the student's request, in accordance with the institution's stated policies, or to agencies or individuals authorized by law to review such records.

            (vi) The institution shall not be in violation of State and/or Federal statute, where such violation demonstrates incompetence and/or fraud in the management of the institution in the judgement of the commissioner.          

            (2)  Published policies. The institution shall establish, publish and enforce explicit policies with respect to:

            (i) .  .  .

            (ii) .  .  .

            (iii) requirements for admission of students to the institution and to specific [curricula] programs of study, requirements for residence, graduation, awarding of credit, degrees or other credentials, grading, standards of progress, payment of fees of any nature, refunds, withdrawals, standards of conduct, disciplinary measures and redress of grievances.

            (g)  Support services. 

(1) The institution shall assure that whenever and wherever the institution offers courses as part of a [curriculum] program of study it shall provide adequate support services, taking into account its mission and the needs of its students.

            (2) Institutions that admit students with academic deficiencies shall provide sufficient supplemental academic services to enable them to make satisfactory progress toward program completion.

            (h)  Admissions. 

(1) The admission of students shall be determined through an orderly process using published criteria consistent with the institution's mission that shall be uniformly applied.

            (2) Admissions shall take into account both the capacity of the student to undertake a course of study and the capacity of the institution to provide the instructional and other support the student needs to complete the program.

            (3) Among other considerations [,the admissions process shall encourage the increased participation in collegiate programs at all levels of]  and consistent with its mission, the institution shall take measures to increase enrollment in academic programs at all degree levels by persons from groups historically underrepresented in such programs.

            (4) An institution shall not refuse a student's request for transfer of credit based solely upon the source of accreditation of the sending institution, where the sending institution is institutionally accredited for Title IV purposes by an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education for such purposes.

            (i)  Consumer information.  

             (1) The following information shall be included in all catalogs of the institution: 

            [(1)] (i)  Information shall be provided on financial assistance available to students, costs of attending the institution, the refund policy of the institution, and the instructional programs and other related aspects of the institution.  Information shall include programs of financial assistance from State, Federal, institutional and other sources.  Information on the institution’s standards of progress shall be disclosed, if different from those utilized for State student financial aid programs. 

            [(2)] (ii) . . .

            [(i)] (a) . . .

            [(ii)] (b) . . .

            [(iii)] (c) . . .

            [(iv)] (d) . . .

            [(3)] (iii) The institution shall state its policy and requirements on student withdrawal from the institution and its policy and requirements concerning refunds due to failure of students to complete an academic term for any reason.  The policy shall include the percentage or amount of tuition, fees, institution-operated room and board, and other assessments to be refunded after specified elapsed periods of time. 

            [(4)] (iv) The instructional programs of the institution shall be described accurately. 

            [(i)] (a) . . .      

            [(ii)] (b)  Program descriptions.  Each degree, certificate or diploma program shall be described in terms of [both] program objectives, prerequisites and requirements for completion.

            [(iii)] (c) . . .

            [(iv)] (d) . . .   

            [(v)] (e) Faculty and other instructional personnel.  Regular resident faculty shall be listed by rank, with the highest degree held by the faculty member and the institution by which such degree was granted, full-time or part-time status, and department or major program area to which such member is assigned.  An estimated number of adjunct faculty and teaching assistants in each department or major program area shall be provided. 

            [(vi)] (f)  Recruiting and admission practices. The process and criteria for the recruitment and admission of students to the institution and to specific [curricula] programs of study, as required by subparagraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section and by subdivision (h) of this section, shall be published.

            [(vii)] (g)  Academic calendar. The academic calendar of the institution, and of specific [curricula] programs of study, if different, shall be published.

            [(viii)] (h)  Grading. The grading policy of the institution, and of specific [curricula] programs of study, if different, shall be published.

            [(ix)] (i) . . .

            [(x)](j) . . .

            (v)  Information shall be provided on the institution’s code of conduct for students and any disciplinary measures that may be applied to a student for a violation of such conduct, with a description of the institution’s student disciplinary process. 

            (2) Institutions that produce a multi-year catalog may use an annual printed addendum to update the information in the catalog or, if the catalog is also online, a website update.   All print and online catalogs shall be archived annually, and archived copies shall be retained permanently.

            (3) The institution shall demonstrate that it continuously assesses the effectiveness of its efforts to provide students and prospective students with timely, accurate, and complete consumer information.

            [(5)] (4) . . . 

            (j) . . .

             (k)  HEA title IV program responsibilities. 

            [(1) . .  .] 

            [(2)] (1) . . .     

            [(3)] (2) . . .

            (l) . . .

            (m) . . .

4-1.5 Procedures for accreditation. 

[(a) . . . ]

[(b)] (a) Comprehensive review procedures.

(1) . . .

(2) . . .

            (3) . . .

            (4) . . .

            (5) . . .            

            (6) . . .

            (7) . . .

(8) . . .

(9) Appeal of advisory council recommendation.

(i) . . .

(ii) Within 10 days of the date that the institution receives notification of the findings and recommendations of the advisory council, the institution and/or the deputy commissioner shall notify the commissioner in writing, by first class mail, express delivery, or personal service, of its intention to appeal pursuant to clause (a) of subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph or the deputy commissioner shall notify the commissioner of its intention to appeal pursuant to clause (b) of subparagraph (iii) of this paragraph.

[(ii)] (iii)  Within [15] 25 days of the date that the institution receives notification of the findings and recommendations of the advisory council, the institution may commence an appeal pursuant to clause (a) of this subparagraph or the deputy commissioner may commence an appeal pursuant to clause (b) of this subparagraph. 

            (a) . . .

            (b) . . .

            (c) . . .

            [(iii)] (iv) . . .

            (10) . . .

            (11)  Appeal of a determination of adverse accreditation action or probationary accreditation through Regents reconsideration.

            (i) . . .

            (ii)  Within five days of the date of a Regents determination of adverse accreditation action or granting probationary accreditation, the institution shall notify the commissioner in writing, by first class mail, express delivery, or personal service, of its intention to appeal, with an affidavit proving the service of a copy thereof upon the deputy commissioner by first class mail, express delivery, or personal service.

            [(ii)] (iii)  Within [15] 20 days of the date of a Regents determination of adverse accreditation action or granting probationary accreditation, the institution may commence an appeal of such determination by filing with the commissioner by first class mail, express delivery, or personal service the original appeal papers, with an affidavit proving the service of a copy thereof upon the deputy commissioner by first class mail, express delivery, or personal service. 

            [(iii)] (iv) . . .

            [(iv)] (v) . . .

            [(v)] (vi) . . .

            [(vi)] (vii) . . .

            [(vii)] (viii) . . .

[(c)] (b) Compliance review procedures. 

(1) . . .

(2) . . .

            (3) . . .

            (4) . . .

            (5) . . .            

            (6) . . .

            (7) . . .

            (8) Appeal of advisory council recommendation. The procedures prescribed in paragraph [(b)(9)] (a)(9) of this section shall be applicable.

(9) . . .

(10)  An institution may appeal a Regents determination of adverse accreditation action or granting probationary accreditation through a request for the Regents to reconsider its determination in accordance with the requirements and procedures of paragraph [(b)(11)] (a)(11) of this section. The institution shall have the right to be represented by counsel during the appeal.

[(d)](c) Procedures for institutions on probationary accreditation. 

(1) . . .

(2) . . .

(3) . . .

            (4) . . .

(5) . . .

            (6) . . .

(7) . . .

(8) Appeal of advisory council recommendation. The procedures prescribed in paragraph [(b)(9)] (a)(9) of this section shall be applicable.

            (9) . . .

            (10) An institution may appeal a Regents determination of adverse accreditation action or granting probationary accreditation through a request for the Regents to reconsider its determination in accordance with the requirements and procedures of paragraph [(b)(11)] (a)(11) of this section. The institution shall have the right to be represented by counsel during the appeal.

[(e)](d) . . .