ACTA's Must-Reads
« Colorado gets it right | Main | Hank Brown on Ward Churchill »
Reforming accreditation
ACTA's new policy paper on accreditation, Why Accreditation Doesn't Work and What Policymakers Can Do About It, is causing quite a stir--and is prompting the accreditation establishment to acknowledge some of the real and pressing problems with the current system. At Inside Accreditation, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has issued a response to ACTA's report that recognizes the importance of both its criticisms and recommendations. Though CHEA and ACTA do have their differences, this is one instance where their perspectives converge:
... the ACTA paper does raise questions and issues that are important to the enterprise. Some of these topics have been raised by the higher education and accreditation communities themselves. These include whether the gatekeeping role that accreditation was asked to take on by the federal government in 1952 continues to make sense for all parties involved - the government, higher education and accreditation. There is discussion of the importance of enhanced rigor in higher education, especially through additional attention to student achievement. The paper urges that the diversity of higher education institutions be maintained. It addresses the role of the market and increased competition as perhaps strengthening accreditation practice. It speaks to benefit [sic] that could accrue to accreditation through providing more sustained and reliable information to the public about quality.
... Of the issues that the paper raises, two are fundamental to the future of accreditation and how it operates. Accreditation needs a frank reappraisal of its relationship to the federal government and the gatekeeping function. How, going forward, should this be configured? Can the current gatekeeping arrangement continue to be effective and, if so, how? Would the end of gatekeeping mean the end of accreditation as some fear? Accreditors need to carefully consider the importance of greater public accountability to the future credibility of accreditation. Specifically, how, going forward, will accreditation intensify and accelerate its responsiveness to the insistent calls for greater accountability, especially as this relates to student achievement and public information? There is much work to be done.
Recognizing that "the ACTA paper does provide a service," CHEA finds plenty of common ground between ACTA's perception of the problems with accreditation and accreditors' own assessment of how the present system needs to be revised for greater effectiveness, integrity, and accountability. CHEA specifically notes how crucial it is for the accreditation system to respond more swiftly and meaningfully to demands for accountability--and in this respect, ACTA and CHEA might be said, quite literally, to be on the same page. As ACTA has long noted, accountability is a crucial but neglected aspect of academic freedom; the lifeblood of higher education--free inquiry and the robust exchange of ideas--depends upon colleges and universities being accountable for the intellectual vitality of their campuses and for their educational outcomes.
Posted by acta online at July 26, 2007 11:48 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.goactablog.org/blog/mt-tb.cgi/387