Since the University underwent successful reaffirmation in 1994, the Commission on Colleges has carried out a major revision of its criteria and published them as Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement . The resulting document is striking in its emphasis on the principles of peer review, integrity, quality, and a focus on student learning. Gone is the centrality of the old self-study, and in its place the Commission has set out two major documents, one, a Compliance Certification wherein institutions speak to their compliance with a set of Core Requirements, Comprehensive Standards, and Federal Requirements, and another, called a Quality Enhancement Plan, in which institutions outline a plan for improvement of student learning with participation of all campus units. For the first time, then, institutions in the SACS region come out of reaffirmation with a clear, strategic document to guide them toward an improved student learning experience.

Georgia Southern has employed a structure for reaffirmation consisting of a SACS Leadership Team aided by Support Teams from across the entire institution. The Support Teams gave special attention to their areas of expertise in the Principles of Accreditation and have submitted elements of the Compliance Certification and objectives for the Quality Enhancement Plan. Their names are listed here: Compliance Certification Teams and the Quality Enhancement Plan Teams.

Steps in the Accreditation Process

1. The Commission on Colleges conducts an orientation for members of the institution's Leadership Team.
2. The institution prepares and submits its Compliance Certification and relevant supporting documentation (and annual institutional profiles) to the Commission on Colleges.
3. The Off-Site Review Committee reviews the Compliance Certification and supporting documentation. The Committee prepares a report of its findings for each institution it reviews.
4. The Commission staff orally communicates to the institution a summary of the report prepared by the Off-Site Review Committee. The institution may choose to submit a Focused Report in response to the committee's findings. The On-Site Committee receives a written copy of the Off-Site Committee's report and the institution's Focused Report, if one is submitted.
5. The institution submits its Quality Enhancement Plan to the Commission.
6. The On-Site Review Committee visits the institution to review and determine the acceptability of the QEP, to review areas of non-compliance and other areas of concern noted by the Off-Site Committee, and to review any areas of concern that surface during the visit. The On-Site committee submits its report to the Commission.
7. The institution prepares a response to the On-Site Committee's report and submits it to the Commission.
8. The Commission reviews the findings included in the report of the On-Site Committee and the institution's response and takes action on the institution's reaffirmation.