Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | matthew-morgan |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Overview of Institutional Accreditation
AASCU Conference, Beijing, China20 October, 2007
Jean Avnet MorsePresident
Middle States Commission on Higher Education
3624 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
www.msche.org [email protected]
Topics
• Overview of U.S. Accreditation
• The Accreditation Process
• Analysis of U.S. Accreditation
Overview of U.S. Accreditation
• Goals of the American accreditation system: – Assure the public that minimum standards are
being met
– Provide a mechanism for institutional improvement
– Allow for a diversity of public and private
institutions
– Provide a self-regulating system that reduces
government regulation
Overview of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• Evaluation is done through peer review examination of:
– Educational programs, student services, financial
condition, administrative effectiveness, treatment
of students, faculty and staff, and includes all
non-degree and specialized programs• Role of the government includes:
– State: Licensure of institutions to grant degrees
– Federal: Provision of loans/grants to students at
accredited institutions
Overview of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• Types of Accreditors
– 7 Regional Accreditors• Examine entire institution
• Similar standards
– Specialized and Professional Accreditors• Specific programs
– National Accreditors• Degree-granting & non-degree granting institutions across
the U.S.
• Specialized type of institutions, e.g. distance learning, liberal
arts colleges
Overview of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• Middle States Accreditation Standards– Principles of the standards
• Concern for student learning and other outcomes vs. inputs and processes
• Concern for flexibility
• Concern for self-assessment, planning and improvement
– Content of the standards• Define mission.
• Engage in ongoing planning regarding resource allocation, finances, personnel and other resources.
• Offer appropriate courses including general education with student support services and qualified faculty and administration
• Plan ongoing assessment in the area of student learning and institutional performance
Overview of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• International Accreditation
– Locations abroad are reviewed whether operated
by a U.S. institution or by a non-accredited
partner.
– Institutions abroad may be accredited provided
that they meet the same requirements as
domestic U.S. institutions.
The Accreditation Process
• There are 4 types of reports that are required from institutions:– The Annual Report or Institutional Profile which provides
basic information on the status of the institution.
– The Self-Study Report which is prepared every 10 years to
provide self-evaluation and planning for the future.
– The Periodic Review Report which is submitted 5 years
after the Self-Study Report.
– The Follow-up Report which provides continued monitoring
of the institution, when needed.
The Accreditation Process cont’d
• Self-Study and Peer Review– Types of self-study: comprehensive, comprehensive with
special emphasis, selected topics, and collaborative reviews.
– Organization of the self-study includes a steering committee and
subcommittees which report to the steering committee
– Timeline of the self-study: a self-study design is created and
approved by MSCHE; a self-study report is created by the
institution; and evaluation team visits.
The Accreditation Process cont’d
• Team Visits
– Proposal of prospective team members selected by
Commission staff is given to the institution for review.
– Team members include: an expert on outcomes
assessment, trained by MSCHE; a finance officer; and
individuals with special expertise pertinent to the
institution’s self-study.
– Team members serve voluntarily and receive a small
honorarium.
– The team compiles its findings and offers recommendations
of actions to the Commission.
The Accreditation Process cont’d
• Types of Actions:– Reaffirmation of accreditation
• Without conditions
• With a request for a follow-up report
• With a request for a follow-up report, followed by a special visit
– Deferment of a decision on accreditation
– Warning that accreditation may be in jeopardy
– Probation
– Show cause as to why accreditation should not be removed
– Remove accreditation
Analysis of U.S. Accreditation
• Strengths
– Promotes a diversity of institutions
– Uses experienced volunteers
– Has flexibility in addressing new issues, new types
of institutions and providers
– Reduces government bureaucracy
– Assures public awareness regarding the
accreditation status of an institution
– Promotes continuous monitoring and continuous
planning
Analysis of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• Areas for Improvement
– Possible duplication of activities among specialized
and institutional accreditors
– Varying requirements of accreditation standards
within the U.S
– Cost of the institution’s time and personnel to
conduct the self-study
– Public’s difficulty in understanding an institution’s
accreditation status, because accreditation does not
provide numerical ratings or rankings
Analysis of U.S. Accreditation cont’d
• Open Questions in U.S. Higher Education– Should accreditation be national?
– Should accreditation be federal?
– Should there be standardized tests for the learning of every
college graduate?
– Are measures such as graduation and job placement rates
appropriate indicators of student learning?
– Should institutions be ranked?
– Should the completed text of self-studies by institutions and
reports prepared by teams be publicly available?