Peer Reviewer Responsibilities and Expectations of Service
Peer Reviewer Roles
HLC peer reviewers are trained to evaluate colleges and universities and provide guidance to help them continuously improve.
Serving as a peer reviewer is an engaging, immersive experience. Reviewers gain insight from colleagues and develop a comprehensive understanding of HLC’s accreditation to help their home institution. Peer reviewers:
Assure quality by evaluating member institutions’ fulfillment of HLC requirements, within the context of their unique contexts and missions.
Support institutional improvement by providing member institutions advice and guidance on their academic offerings and operations.
Service Opportunities
HLC peer reviewers can:
- Conduct multiple types of institutional reviews, ranging from in-person campus visits to online panels evaluating institutional reports.
- Serve as members of HLC decision-making bodies.
- Serve as speakers, trainers and mentors for HLC programs or as members of HLC task forces and advisory teams.
Eligibility for Applying to the Peer Corps
At the time of application, those seeking to become a peer reviewer must:
- Have at least five years of experience in higher ed.
- Have a master’s or other appropriate terminal degree; doctorate preferred. In certain circumstances, individuals with other recognized expertise, skills or experience may be eligible to serve.
- Be currently employed by an institution accredited by and in good standing with HLC.
- Primarily reside in the United States.
Eligibility for Continued Service
Active peer reviewers remain eligible to serve as long as they fulfill HLC’s expectations and requirements:
Certain changes in employment or residency may make a peer reviewer ineligible or limit the length of service.
A reviewer becomes immediately ineligible for service if they are:
- Employed or reside outside the United States
- Employed full-time in higher education consulting
- Employed at any of the following organizations or institutions:
- State higher education agency
- Federal government agency (other than as an employee of an HLC member institution)
- Programmatic or institutional accreditor
- College or university that is in the process of seeking accreditation with HLC
A reviewer is able to finish out the current term of service or serve one additional term if they are:
- Employed outside of higher education (that is not one of the scenarios listed above)
- Employed at an unaccredited college or university.
- Employed at an institution in the United States that is accredited by a recognized accreditor other than HLC.
If a reviewer retires while in the Peer Corps, they can still serve as a peer reviewer. However, there are multiple scenarios for how retirement affects service eligibility depending on the reviewer’s employment status following retirement.
HLC’s definition of retirement as it pertains to the Peer Corps: A peer reviewer is considered retired when (1) the primary role is a position from which the person retired or a position for which the person was awarded emeriti status, and (2) the reviewer is no longer employed in higher education.
Retired With No Other Employment in Higher Ed
Peer reviewers who meet HLC’s definition of retirement may complete their current term and be eligible for one final four-year term through term review. Depending on where the reviewer is in their current term when retirement occurs, they may have a maximum of 4–8 additional years to serve in the Peer Corps.
Retired With Other Employment in Higher Ed
In most cases, any current work within higher education will be the reviewer’s “primary” role. A reviewer’s active role is reported in the Institutional Event Summary (IES) for a review, and institutions must know about the reviewer’s current activity.
Retired from a full-time role while employed part-time (adjunct) at an institution: In this case, the part-time work will be primary and the reviewer is not considered retired by HLC. Whether the institution is accredited by HLC determines if Peer Corps activity is affected.
- Employed at an HLC member institution: The peer reviewer will be eligible through their current term and have ongoing eligibility through term review.
- Employed at an institution that is not accredited by HLC but is accredited by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (USDE): The peer reviewer may complete their current term and be eligible for one additional term through term review.
- Employed at an institution that is unaccredited or accredited by an accreditor that is not recognized by the USDE: The peer reviewer may complete their current term. They will not be eligible for term review.
Retired from an institution and employed in higher ed but not at an institution: In this case, the higher education work will be the primary and the reviewer is considered retired by HLC. The type of work and/or place of employment determine whether Peer Corps activity is affected.
- Employed at any organization or agency who might be considered a competitor of HLC or a part of the “triad”: The peer reviewer will be made immediately inactive.
- Full-time higher education consulting: The peer reviewer will be made immediately inactive.
- Part-time higher education consulting: The peer reviewer will be eligible through their current term and may have ongoing eligibility through term review. The peer reviewer will be required to declare all conflicts.
- Other: We may ask for details to ensure compliance with HLC procedures. Please reach out to [email protected].
How do you report your retirement scenario? Please follow the Canopy User Guide for Retirement for step-by-step instructions. If your situation does not fall within the scenarios provided, please contact us at [email protected].
Commitment
Term Length
Peer reviewers have an initial term of two years. Once the initial term is completed, they may be reappointed for a four-year term. After each term, they may be reappointed for successive four-year terms.
Time Commitment
Serving as a peer reviewer offers a wealth of experience, with opportunities to visit campuses and dive deep into the accreditation process. This means the role can require a significant time commitment.
Reviewers should accept at least one evaluation assignment per year. These require different time commitments and types of work.
Most common assignment time commitments:
- Evaluation visit: 20-30 hours preparing and pre-writing for the visit, two to three full days of work during the visit and 5-10 hours after the visit reviewing and revising the team report.
- Panel or a project review: 10–12 hours conducting the review, possible two to three hours in phone conference and one to two hours writing and revising the report.
- Electronic evaluation (such as an Open Pathway Year 4 Assurance Review): 30-40 hours across 4-10 weeks reviewing institutional materials and writing and revising the team report.
Reviewers receive an honorarium, plus reasonable travel expenses, for each review. The honorarium varies per type of review.
How Peer Reviewers Are Selected for Evaluations
We consider multiple factors when selecting a peer reviewer for an assignment. This may include the training they’ve completed, whether they have conflicts of interest with the institution, service record, areas of expertise, and employment/education history.
On each team, we ensure representation of both academics in the teaching and learning process and administrators responsible for institutional oversight.
Please note: A peer reviewer cannot conduct evaluations if they are employed at an institution that is not in good standing with HLC (e.g., the institution is placed on sanction, issued a Show-Cause Order or has an adverse action taken against it by HLC).
Expectations for Reviewers
HLC peer reviewers exemplify professionalism, competence, objectivity and fair judgment.
Professionalism
Peer reviewers fulfill their role in a professional manner.
- Preparation. Reviewers thoroughly research institutions, studying documents and identifying questions and opportunities for guidance in advance of the assignment.
- Judgments and Decisions. Reviewers exercise their best judgment when evaluating an institution. Reviewers will have to make difficult decisions, even in the face of conflicting personal opinions.
- Confidentiality. All materials and information that reviewers obtain from HLC or institutions is confidential. This includes the content of the evaluation, which cannot be discussed with anyone other than those reviewers and HLC staff directly involved. If reviewers receive inquiries from or about the institution, they should be directed to HLC. Reviewers should not speak on behalf of HLC regarding an accreditation event.
- Collegiality and Consensus. Reviewers should be skilled in collaboration and decision-making and strive for consensus when making decisions about an institution.
Competence
Reviewers should be skilled in technology and using computers; interviewing, facilitation and listening; evaluative writing; team participation and consensus; and time management.
Reviewers should also have:
- An understanding of the history, values and trends of American higher ed
- The ability to identify what is appropriate for an institution in terms of its mission and good practice at similar institutions
- Appreciation and knowledge of good practice in higher ed
- Fairness and reason in exercising judgment
- Cultural sensitivity
- A calm, balanced demeanor in the face of tension or difficulty
- Open-mindedness to other ways of designing and delivering higher learning
- The ability to accept direction and feedback
Objectivity and Fair Judgment
We entrust peer reviewers to make impartial and objective decisions. Therefore, we do not allow anyone to participate in a review whose past or present activities could affect their ability to be impartial and objective. Reviewers are required to inform us of any barrier to impartiality and objectivity.
Read more about HLC’s objectivity and conflict of interest policies:
Education and Training
Our peer reviewers are experts in HLC accreditation, and they’re able to stay up to date and sharpen their skills through our training programs. Within the initial two-year term and before their first evaluation, reviewers participate in training on the application of HLC’s Criteria for Accreditation, policies and the processes integral to evaluations.
We also offer webinars and additional training as needed for reviewers to get the information they need to stay current in their roles.
Training registration fees cover the cost of training materials, and peer reviewers are responsible for travel, and lodging expenses. The honoraria that reviewers receive for conducting reviews can offset the costs of training.
Evaluation and Feedback
HLC collects feedback from key participants about the peer review process. Evaluation responses are used for the peer reviewers’ term reviews, improving training programs, and evaluating the effectiveness of HLC processes.
Related Resources
