Jump to content

Higher education accreditation in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Regional accreditation)

This article is part of a series on
Education in the
United States
Summary
Curriculum topics
Education policy issues
Levels of education
icon Education portal
flag United States portal

Higher education accreditation in the United States is a peer review process by which the validity of degrees and credits awarded by higher education institutions is assured. It is coordinated by accreditation commissions made up of member institutions. It was first undertaken in the late 19th century by cooperating educational institutions, on a regional basis.

The federal government began to play a limited role in higher education accreditation in 1952 with reauthorization of the G.I. Bill for Korean War veterans. The original GI Bill legislation had stimulated establishment of new colleges and universities to accommodate the influx of new students, but some of these new institutions were of dubious quality. The 1952 legislation designated the existing peer review process as the basis for measuring institutional quality; GI Bill eligibility was limited to students enrolled at accredited institutions included on a list of federally recognized accredited institutions published by the U.S. Commissioner of Education.[1]

The U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) (a non-governmental organization) both recognize reputable accrediting bodies for institutions of higher education and provide guidelines as well as resources and relevant data regarding these accreditors. Neither the U.S. Department of Education nor CHEA accredit individual institutions.[2] With the creation of the U.S. Department of Education and under the terms of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, the U.S. Secretary of Education is required by law to publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies that the secretary has determined to be reliable authorities on the quality of education or training provided by the institutions of higher education and the higher education programs they accredit.[3]

Professional schools, which are often graduate schools, have separate organizations for accreditation, e.g. American Board of Higher Education (ABHEC).

Institutional accreditation

[edit]

Institutional accreditation applies to the entire institution, specific programs, and distance education within an institution.[4]

Regional and national accreditation

[edit]

Prior to 2020, there were regional and national accrediting agencies, both of which were accountable to the Department of Education. Regional bodies historically accredited institutions in a particular region of the country. National bodies were established to accredit institutions across the country, and sometimes beyond it. Within American higher education, regional bodies were considered more prestigious. (The regional bodies were older, and included the most well established institutions.)[5]

In February 2020, the Department of Education eliminated the distinction between regional and national accrediting agencies, creating one unified set of institutional accreditors.[6] The department claimed that the change was intended to encourage cooperation between accredited schools to improve student experiences, uphold quality standards, and reduce the cost of higher education by encouraging transparent transfer of credits and mutual recognition of degrees between schools with common standards. It also claimed that the change was intended to allow students to be able to access the best school for their needs no matter what region they reside in.[7]

Four months after this change was made, the WASC Senior College and University Commission became the first accreditor to formally change its membership rules and requirements to allow institutions outside its historical geographic region to apply for membership and accreditation.[8]

Historically, educational accreditation activities in the United States were overseen by seven regional accrediting agencies established in the late 19th and early 20th century to foster articulation between secondary schools and higher education institutions, particularly evaluation of prospective students by colleges and universities.[9][10] These seven agencies were membership organizations of educational institutions within their geographic regions. Initially, the main focus of the organizations was to accredit secondary schools and to establish uniform college entrance requirements.[9][10] Accreditation of colleges and universities followed later, with each of the accrediting agencies splitting into separate organizations with one or more of those organizations focused exclusively on accrediting colleges and universities.[10] The higher education institutions holding regional accreditation were primarily non-profit institutions, with significant exceptions, as the largest US for-profit universities (e.g., University of Phoenix, Grand Canyon University) achieved regional accreditation.[11][12][13]

Regionally accredited schools were usually academically oriented and most were non-profit. Nationally accredited schools, a large number of which are for-profit, typically offered specific vocational, career, or technical programs. Regionally accredited institutions employed large numbers of full-time faculty, and the faculty set the academic policies. Regionally-accredited schools were required to have adequate library facilities. Except for some specific subject areas such as nursing, nationally accredited schools did not hire many full-time faculty, usually hiring faculty by the course, without benefits and with no influence on the school's academic policies, which were determined by non-academic administrators, and ultimately investors. Their library facilities, if they existed at all, were far inferior to those of regionally-accredited schools. While there were some legitimate and well-intentioned nationally accredited schools, similar to for-profit institutions with regional accreditation, some institutions existed with little educational rigor. Some critics considered national accreditation to be not as reputable as regional accreditation.[5] Schools accredited by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges, a national accreditor, were occasionally sued for leading prospective students to believe, incorrectly, that they would have no problem transferring their credits to a regionally accredited school.[14][15][16]

Recognized institutional accreditors

[edit]

The U.S. Department of Education recognizes the following organizations as institutional accreditors:[17]

Formerly recognized accreditors

[edit]

Programmatic accreditation

[edit]

These accreditors typically cover a specific program of professional education or training, but in some cases they cover the whole institution. Best practices are shared and developed through affiliation with the Association of Professional and Specialized Accreditors.[18] Both the US Department of Education[19] and CHEA[20] maintain lists of recognized US programmatic accreditors:

Organization Acronym CHEA Recognized? USDE Recognized? Note
Accreditation Commission for Acupuncture and Herbal Medicine ACAOM No Yes
Accreditation Commission for Audiology Education ACAE Yes No
Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing ACEN Yes Yes
Accreditation Commission for Midwifery Education ACME No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs ACBSP Yes No
Accreditation Council for Education in Nutrition and Dietetics, Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics ACEND No Yes
Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education ACPE Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Accreditation Council on Optometric Education ACOE Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant ARC-PA Yes No
Accrediting Bureau of Health Education Schools ABHES No Yes
Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications ACEJMC Yes No
American Academy of Forensic Sciences Forensic Science Education Programs Accreditation Commission AAFS-FEPAC Yes No
American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences, Council for Accreditation AAFCS-CFA Yes No
American Board of Funeral Service Education, Committee on Accreditation ABFSE Yes Yes
American Council for Construction Education ACCE Yes No
American Culinary Federation Education Foundation, Accrediting Commission ACFEF-AC Yes No
American Library Association, Committee on Accreditation ALA-CoA Yes No
American Occupational Therapy Association, Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education AOTA-ACOTE Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
American Osteopathic Association, Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation AOA-COCA No Yes
American Physical Therapy Association, Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education APTA-CAPTE Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
American Podiatric Medical Association, Council on Podiatric Medical Education APMA-CPME Yes Yes
American Psychological Association, Commission on Accreditation APA-CoA Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
American Veterinary Medical Association, Council on Education AVMA-COE Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation AAQEP Yes No
Association for Behavior Analysis International Accreditation Board ABAI Yes No
Association for Biblical Higher Education Commission on Accreditation ABHE Yes Yes
Association for Clinical Pastoral Education, Accreditation Commission ACPE Inc No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Association of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering ATMAE Yes No
Aviation Accreditation Board International AABI Yes No
Commission on Accreditation for Health Informatics and Information Management Education CAHIIM Yes No
American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy COAMFTE-AAMFT Yes No
Commission on Accreditation for Respiratory Care CoARC Yes No
Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs CAAHEP Yes No
Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education CAATE Yes No
Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education CAHME Yes No
Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs CAMPEP Yes No
Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education CCNE No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
American Dental Association CODA No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Commission on English Language Program Accreditation CEA No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Commission on Massage Therapy Accreditation COMTA No Yes
Commission on Opticianry Accreditation COA-OP Yes No
Commission on Sport Management Accreditation COSMA Yes No
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs CACREP Yes No
Council for Interior Design Accreditation CIDA Yes No
Council for Standards in Human Service Education CSHSE Yes No
Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation CAEP Yes No
American Bar Association ABA No Yes
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association CAA-ASHA Yes Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Council on Accreditation of Nurse Anesthesia Educational Programs COA Yes Yes
Council on Accreditation of Parks, Recreation, Tourism and Related Professions COAPRT Yes No
Council on Chiropractic Education CCE Yes Yes
Council on Education for Public Health CEPH No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Council on Naturopathic Medical Education CNME No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Council on Social Work Education, Commission on Accreditation CSWE-COA Yes No
International Accreditation Council for Business Education IACBE Yes No
International Fire Service Accreditation Congress - Degree Assembly IFSAC-DA Yes No
Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology JRCERT Yes Yes
Joint Review Committee on Educational Programs in Nuclear Medicine Technology JRCNMT Yes No
American Society of Landscape Architects LAAB-ASLA Yes No
Liaison Committee on Medical Education LCME No Yes Not eligible for Title IV funding
Masters in Psychology and Counseling Accreditation Council MPCAC Yes No
Midwifery Education Accreditation Council MEAC No Yes
Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education MACTE No Yes
National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences NAACLS Yes No
National Association for the Education of Young Children NAEYC Yes No
National Association of Schools of Art and Design Commission on Accreditation NASAD No Yes
National Association of Schools of Dance Commission on Accreditation NASD No Yes
National Association of Schools of Music Commission on Accreditation NASM No Yes
National Association of Schools of Theatre Commission on Accreditation NAST No Yes
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education NCATE Yes Yes
Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration, Commission on Peer Review and Accreditation NASPAA-COPRA Yes No
Planning Accreditation Board PAB Yes No
Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System PCSAS Yes No
Teacher Education Accreditation Council TEAC Yes Yes

For broad resources on how programmatic accreditation is managed in the United States (and globally) see Accreditation.org which provides background on the process, accords, agreements, and accrediting bodies related to engineering and computing degrees.

Other recognized accreditors

[edit]

Several organizations exist that accredit institutions and which are not recognized by the U.S. Department of Education or CHEA. These include:

Religious accreditors

[edit]

Although many schools related to religious organizations hold regional accreditation or secular national accreditation, there are four different agencies that specialize in accreditation of religious schools:

These groups specialize in accrediting theological and religious schools including seminaries and graduate schools of theology, as well as broader-scope universities that teach from a religious viewpoint and may require students and/or faculty to subscribe to a statement of faith.[citation needed] Additionally, as of 2009, 20 U.S. states and Puerto Rico had some form of exemption provision under which religious institutions can grant religious degrees without accreditation or government oversight.[22][23]

Use of .edu top-level Internet domain

[edit]
Main article: .edu

Since 2001, the use of the top-level internet domain, .edu has been restricted to accredited institutions, but non-qualifying institutions can still use .edu domain names obtained before the current rules came into force.[24] A prominent example of such a domain name registered before the current rules came into force is Academia.edu, a for-profit social networking site for academics.

Criticism of accreditation

[edit]

Various commenters have written about the role and effectiveness of the American accreditation system. It has drawn particular interest since the rise of e-learning classes and institutions. A frequent point of discussion and criticism is that the traditional system is limited to measuring "input" factors, such as adequate facilities and properly credentialed faculty, rather than the quality of a school's educational output.[25]

In his 1996 book Crisis in the Academy, Christopher J. Lucas criticized the accreditation system as too expensive, onerously complicated, incestuous in its organization, and not properly tied to quality.[26][27] Similarly, a 2002 report by George C. Leef and Roxana D. Burris of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) argued that the system does not ensure or protect educational quality, while still imposing significant costs.[28][29] In a 2006 "issue paper", Robert C. Dickeson wrote that a lack of transparency, low and lax standards, and outdated regionalization were among the problems with regional accreditation.[30] Others, such as Edward M. Elmendorf of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, reject these claims, arguing that they are "picking around the edges" of a proven and necessary system for upholding standards.[26][31] Thomas C. Reeves notes that some schools unable or unwilling to meet the standards of traditional, regional accrediting bodies are closely involved in creating national accrediting agencies with significantly lower standards.[32]

At various times the U.S. government has investigated changes to the accreditation system. In 2002 the House of Representatives Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness criticized the system.[31] Accreditation was a major topic of the Spellings Commission, which released its report on September 26, 2006.[33] The Council for Higher Education Accreditation recognizes that there are criticisms,[34] but has opposed these calls for reform, with President Judith S. Eaton arguing that the system is successful and needs to remain flexible to accommodate differences between schools and disciplines.[31] In 2013, President Barack Obama proposed changes in the accreditation system to hold "colleges accountable for cost, value, and quality".[35] He requested Congress change the Higher Education Act so that affordability and value are considered in determining which institutions are accredited and allow students access to federal financial aid; his criticism was directed at for-profit institutions.[36]

An article published by "University World News" on 2 February 2018 stated that the higher education accreditation community, which confers the quality-assurance seal of approval that allows United States colleges and universities access to billions of dollars of federal student aid, must do a better job of explaining itself to the public if it wants to reverse waning public confidence in higher education. That was one of the tamer recommendations voiced at a conference for accreditors, who are feeling the brunt of growing scepticism about the value of a US college degree.[37]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Recognition of Accreditation Organizations: A Comparison of Policy & Practice of Voluntary Accreditation and The United States Department of Education" (PDF). CHEA. January 1998. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 15, 2010. Retrieved November 6, 2009.
  2. ^ U.S. Department of Education, Accreditation in the United States
  3. ^ College Review Journal, Complete List of National Accrediting Agencies Archived 2011-06-16 at the Wayback Machine.
  4. ^ U.S. Department of Education, Accreditation in the United States
  5. ^ a b Aasen, Adam (November 18, 2008). "Battle rages on accreditation, college money". The Florida Times-Union. Retrieved June 3, 2011.
  6. ^ 2020 February USDoEd Final Accreditation and State Authorization Regulations [1]
  7. ^ Judith Eaton, CHEA President Expresses Pros and Cons for Regionals going National https://www.chea.org/will-regional-accreditation-go-national-0
  8. ^ Lederman, Doug (February 27, 2020). "Go East (or North), Regional Accreditor". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved April 23, 2022.
  9. ^ a b Fred F. Harcleroad and Judith S. Eaton (2005), "The Hidden Hand: External Constituencies and their Impact," Chapter 9 in Philip G. Altbach, Robert Oliver Berdahl, and Patricia J. Gumport, editors, American higher education in the twenty-first century: social, political, and economic challenges. Page 263. JHU Press. ISBN 0-8018-8035-1, ISBN 978-0-8018-8035-3.
  10. ^ a b c History of the North Central Association
  11. ^ Judith S. Eaton, Accreditation and Recognition in the United States Archived 2012-03-07 at the Wayback Machine, CHEA, 2008.
  12. ^ Geteducated.com. "Regional Accreditation vs National Accreditation for Online Colleges". Retrieved March 20, 2018.
  13. ^ Lechuga, Vicente (2005). The Changing Landscape of the Academic Profession. Routledge. p. 48. ISBN 9781135508678. Regional accreditation is considered more prestigious than national accreditation.
  14. ^ Heffter, Emily; Perry, Nick (February 24, 2006). "Student Takes on College and Wins". Seattle Times. Retrieved June 1, 2010 – via nwsource.com.
  15. ^ Billman, Jeffrey C. (April 14, 2005). "Bad Education". Orlandoweekly.com. Retrieved June 1, 2010.
  16. ^ Hechinger, John (October 3, 2005). "A Battle Over Standards At For-Profit Colleges". Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on December 4, 2008. Retrieved June 1, 2010 – via Collegejournal.com.
  17. ^ "Institutional Accrediting Agencies". U.S. Department of Education. 2021. Retrieved May 25, 2021.
  18. ^ "Association of Professional and Specialized Accreditors". ASPA-USA.org. March 31, 2003. Retrieved June 1, 2010.
  19. ^ "Accreditation in the United States: Programmatic Accrediting Agencies". U.S. Department of Education. June 28, 2021. Retrieved July 3, 2021.
  20. ^ "Programmatic Accrediting Organizations". Council for Higher Education Accreditation. 2021. Retrieved July 3, 2021.
  21. ^ The Committee of Bar Examiners, State Bar of California (August 28, 2009). Guidelines for Accredited Law School Rules. Retrieved October 4, 2010.
  22. ^ Religious Exempt Schools Archived 2011-02-21 at the Wayback Machine, Oregon Student Assistance Commission Office of Degree Authorization website, accessed March 21, 2011
  23. ^ Exemptions from the higher education licensing process for religious colleges Archived 2018-03-21 at the Wayback Machine, Connecticut General Assembly website, accessed March 21, 2018
  24. ^ ".edu Internet Addresses". Diploma Mills and Accreditation – Diploma Mills. United States Department of Education. December 23, 2009. Retrieved February 19, 2010.
  25. ^ Reeves, Thomas C. (2003). "Storm Clouds on the Digital Education Horizon". Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 15 (1): 12–13. doi:10.1007/BF02940850. S2CID 15523346.
  26. ^ a b Reeves, Thomas C. (2003). "Storm Clouds on the Digital Education Horizon". Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 15 (1): 14. doi:10.1007/BF02940850. S2CID 15523346.
  27. ^ Lucas, Christopher J. (1996). Crisis in the Academy: Rethinking Higher Education in America. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 9780312129361.
  28. ^ Leef, George C.; Burris, Roxana D. (2002). "Can college accreditation live up to its promise?" (PDF). American Council of Trustees and Alumni. Retrieved September 7, 2012. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  29. ^ Reeves, Thomas C. (2003). "Storm Clouds on the Digital Education Horizon". Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 15 (1): 13–14. doi:10.1007/BF02940850. S2CID 15523346.
  30. ^ Doug Lederman (March 31, 2006). "Dropping a Bomb on Accreditation". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved May 17, 2013.
  31. ^ a b c Richard Morgan (October 11, 2002). "Lawmakers Call for More Accountability From Accreditation System". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved September 7, 2012.
  32. ^ Reeves, Thomas C. (2003). "Storm Clouds on the Digital Education Horizon". Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 15 (1): 12, 14–15. doi:10.1007/BF02940850. S2CID 15523346.
  33. ^ Spellings Commission (2006). A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education (PDF). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. p. 5. Accreditation, along with federal and state regulation, can impede creative new approaches as well.
  34. ^ Eaton, Judith S. (June 28–29, 2001). "Taking a look at ourselves, accreditation". Letter from the President. Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Archived from the original on March 22, 2013. Retrieved April 12, 2013. U.S. accreditation, then, is a robust, complex and unwieldy and sometimes controversial enterprise. These are the first things that we see when we 'take a look at ourselves, accreditation...'
  35. ^ Eric Kelderman (February 13, 2013). "Obama's Accreditation Proposals Surprise Higher-Education Leaders". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved April 12, 2013.
  36. ^ Chris Parr (February 21, 2013). "Obama wants cost to feature in accreditation scheme". Times Higher Education. Retrieved April 19, 2013.
  37. ^ Mary Beth Marklein (February 2, 2018). "HE accreditation sector faces pressure to reform". Retrieved August 19, 2020.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Higher_education_accreditation_in_the_United_States&oldid=1258900682#Regional_accreditation"