310 likes | 392 Views
Higher Education Accreditation: A Look at the USA and Japan. David Werner Visiting Researcher Local Human Resources and Public Policy System, Open Research Center (LORC), Ryukoku University December 27, 2004. Today’s Presentation: Five Topics. My accreditation Experience
E N D
Higher Education Accreditation: A Look at the USA and Japan David Werner Visiting Researcher Local Human Resources and Public Policy System, Open Research Center (LORC), Ryukoku University December 27, 2004
Today’s Presentation: Five Topics My accreditation Experience Overview of Accreditation in the USA Current Issues in Accreditation in the USA Accreditation in Japan Accreditation Issues in Japan
My Accreditation Experience • Academic Administrator • Accreditor • Work with National Associations of Accreditors • Research on Accreditation
North Central Association, Higher Learning Commission AACSB—Business ADA—Dental Medicine NCATE—Education NLNAC—Nursing CSWE—Social Work NASPAA—Public Administration ABET—Engineering ACCE—Construction NASM—Music CoA-NA—Nurse Anesthesia ASHA/CAA—Speech Pathology ACPE—Pharmacy Accreditation Experience as an Administrator
Experience as an Accreditor • AACSB—Business: 1977—1987 • NCA--Regional Accreditor: 1983—2004 • ADA—Dental Medicine: 1998—2001 • APA—Clinical Psychology: 2002—present
Experience with National Associations • CHEA: Council for Higher Education Accreditation • ASPA: Association of Specialized and Professional Accreditors
Purpose of Accreditation Mechanism for quality assurance -to the public -to prospective students -to parents Process for continuous improvement
Philosophy of Accreditation Non-governmental - US distrust of government -state vs. national government Voluntary Peer review
Structure: Three Types of Accreditors Regional Accreditors: Accredit Entire Institution -Six Regions -Similar to the JUAA National Accreditors: Accredit Institutions -Six recognized National Accreditors Specialized Accreditors: Accredit Programs -About 60 Specialized Accreditors -Accreditation in “professional” fields -Like JABEE
Brief History of Accreditation in USA • First regional accrediting agency in 1885 • First accreditation action: 1910 • First specialized accrediting agency in 1907—medicine • Accrediting agencies added in response to: -growth of higher education -development of new fields of study -response to professions • Accreditation and accrediting agencies change continually
Who “Accredits” the Accreditors? • Approval Process Called “Recognition” • National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (US Department of Education) • Council for Higher Education Accreditation
National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity • Unit of Federal Government “Recognizes” (Approves) Accreditors Five year review cycle Recognition provides -status to the agency -makes students eligible for Federal Financial Aid Makes accreditation “semi-voluntary” • Published Criteria for Recognition
Council for Higher Education Accreditation • Not-for-Profit Organization -Universities and colleges are members • Recognition provides status and legitimacy • No connection between CHEA recognition and financial aid • Published Criteria for Recognition
Accreditation Not the Only Means of Quality Control in US • Internal Program Review • Public Universities Review by State Government • Review by System Administration • License to Practice in Some Fields
Current Issues in Accreditation in US • Focus of standards: Inputs, Processes, Educational Outcomes • Confidentiality • Proliferation of Accrediting Agencies
Issue 1: What Focus of Standards? Educational Outcomes Resources Processes
Historical Focus: Resources and Processes • Resources: • Financial Resources • Number of Faculty, • Faculty Qualifications • Support Staff • Quality of Students • Library Resources • Physical Facilities
Historical Focus: Resources and Processes • Processes: • Graduation Requirements • Curriculum • Academic Policies • Student Policies • Student Services
New Focus: Educational Outcomes • What have students learned? • What skills have students developed? • Have graduates found jobs? • What kinds of jobs? • At what companies or institutions? • How do graduates rate their educational experience?
Why this new focus? • Assumption underlying looking at resources and processes is not correct. • Purpose of education is learning; accreditation should focus on learning. • Focus on resources often misused to justify adding resources to programs
Achieving a Balance: Resources, Processes, and Educational Outcomes • Accreditation decisions need to be forward looking • Student outcomes tell how the program has performed in past. • Need to look at resources and processes to determine if educational outcomes will continue • Therefore: resources, processes, and outputs should all be reviewed
Issue 2: Confidentiality: Historic • Only accreditation decision made public: • Accredited • On probation • Not accredited • Self-study, site visit reports, confidential
Issue 3: Growth of Accrediting Agencies • About 60 specialized accrediting agencies • Some presidents want to restrict emergence of new agencies • Some want accreditation limited to fields involving health and public safety • Pressures from new professions
Accreditation in Japan: Past • Quality Control Focused on Approval to Operate by MEXT • Quality Control the Responsibility of Institutions, not an External Agency • JUAA Formed in 1950’s • Many JUAA accredited institutions not reviewed for over 50 years. • National Universities under control of MEXT
Changes in Japan: Education Law Amended Accreditation now required of all universities National Universities now NPOs -NIAD-UE to Evaluate National Universities -Results to be made public MEXT to “recognize” accreditors -Similar to DoE Approval in US -NIAD-UE; JUAA; Possibly Others
Japan Accreditation: Questions • What accrediting agencies will MEXT approve? Institutional and Specialized? • What will be the effect of using “third party” reviewers? • What information will be released to the public? • How will the release of information affect the accreditation process?
Issues to be Addressed in Starting an Accrediting Agency • What will be the organizational structure of the agency? • What relationship will the agency have to the profession or the universities? • How will the agency be funded? • What will be the scope of accreditation? • Who will apply the standards to make accreditation decisions? • How will the decision makers be selected?
More Questions • On what will the accreditation standards focus? • What information will be released to the public? • Who will be the site visitors? How many? • How will site visitors be trained? • How will conflicts of interest be managed? • For how long will accreditation be granted? • How can negative decisions be appealed?
Conclusion Accreditation is Complex Answers to these questions depend on: • culture of the society • culture of the profession
Improving by Working Together: American Examples • Much to learn from each other • ASPA and CRAC as examples -ASPA: Specialized Accreditors -CRAC: Regional Accreditors
Thank you! Questions are welcomed