Published on 2013/12/06

Gatekeepers Under Fire

Accreditors have long been recognized as higher education’s quality gatekeepers, but their inability to react to changes is drawing criticism from stakeholders industry-wide.

Accreditors are central to guaranteeing program and degree quality — ultimately the last hurdle to a program going live — and while many students know little about the process of accreditation, they favor the schools that have it.

“People know they don’t want to go to a school that doesn’t have it,” Belle Wheelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, told the Chronicle of Higher Education.

As higher education is going through a period of massive innovation and change, accreditation groups are finding themselves under fire. Ultimately, new arrivals on the postsecondary scene like competency-based programming and prior learning from massive open online courses are threatening the relevance of accreditors’ work.

The accreditors are fighting back, though, saying that the process is misunderstood by many outside of academia. Meanwhile, government bodies and other associations are loudly calling for major reforms in the accreditation industry.

“Quality, from Washington, D.C.’s standpoint, is job placements and loan paybacks,” Wheelan told the Chronicle of Higher Education. “That’s not our view of quality.”

While Wheelan notes that the financial model in higher education is in dire need of a change, she added that it is not the responsibility of accreditors to turn it around.

While it appears that accreditors appreciate the efforts to move higher education forward, there are also concerns about the protection of students when it comes to manipulating the traditional accreditation standards.

“I think change is coming, and we are responding to it,” Wheelan told the Chronicle of Higher Education. “Nothing happens quickly for us. And that’s part of the problem.”

Print Friendly

Readers Comments

Chuck Dull 2013/12/09 at 10:52 am

Actually Accreditation only became the gate keepers with the Higher Education Act. Prior to that they were a voluntary process to provide a metric of quality, hence the peer review approach. Regional accreditation was about program and academic quality by design not the gate keeper functions of debt, default and job placement. These came about as the original purpose of accreditation got meshed with the Department of Ed desire for an agency to monitor. Now accreditation is so tied to Title IV that institutions survival is tied to accreditation. The gate keeper functions should not be peer review functions, and therein lies the problems with accreditation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

[if lte IE 8]
[if lte IE 8]