An Overview of American Accreditation and Quality Assurance

1
An Overview of American Accreditation and Quality
Assurance

• Ralph A. Wolff
• President and Executive Director
• Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and
  Universities
• Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC)

2
Main Characteristics

• Shared responsibility between the federal
  government, the states, and nongovernmental
  accreditation
• Limitation of powers of federal government under
  11th Amendment no national curricula
• Increased movement from regulatory to quality
  assurance approaches

3
Summary of American Higher Education

• Over 3900 institutions
• Diversity of institutional missions and types
  research, comprehensive, special focus (art,
  science, psychology, medicine, chiropractic),
  public, independent, faith-based
• Over 17 million students diversity of students
  by age, ethnicity, geography
• Over 3 million enrolled in distance education

4
Framework of American Accreditation

• 6 regional accrediting agencies
• 4 national (proprietary) accrediting agencies
• Over 60 specialized accrediting agencies

5
Main Characteristics

• Nongovernmental self-regulatory system
• Applied equally to public and private
  institutions
• Based on peer review
• Standards are nonprescriptive
• Reliance on voluntarism
• Increasing central focus on student learning
  outcomes
• Small staffs (combined regional staffs about 50
  professional staff)

6
Role of States

• Licensure of new institutions to meet minimum
  standards of consumer protection and quality
• Provide access goals and program priorities for
  public universities
• Approve new public campuses and programs
• Review of accredited private institutions only in
  a few states, most exempted

7
Role of Federal Government

• Law (HEA) establishes recognition process for
  institutional financial aid eligibility
• Law sets 9 areas where agencies need standards
• Requires policies on substantive change and
  distance education
• Requires policies and processes required for
  reports, timely and fair decision making,
  complaints, and appeals.

8
Federal Attention to Student Learning Outcomes

• Added as 9th area for agency standards in 1984
• Moved to 1 of 9 areas in 1998
• Success with respect to student academic
  achievement consistent with institutional
  mission
• Now central to the accreditation process

9
Spellings Commission Report

• National Commission issued report in September
  calling for improved access, affordability,
  strong emphasis on innovation
• Focus also on increasing students in STEM
  disciplines
• Efforts to increase accreditation focus on
  accountability and transparency

10
What Do we mean By Focus on Student Learning
Outcomes?

• Clear and appropriate learning outcomes at the
  course, program and institutional levels
• Efforts to align curriculum to outcomes course
  mapping
• Multiple methods of assessment , including but
  going beyond testing
• Active involvement of students in learning and
  assessment

11
Additional Issues

• Focus on pedagogy as well move from stand and
  deliver to facilitated learning
• Key proxies of learning frequent interaction
  with faculty and peers on learning tasks, prompt
  feedback, emphasis on writing and reading
  co-curricular involvement
• Shift from minimum standards to quality
  improvement what level is good enough?
• Move from content orientation how much can I
  cover?

12

• To what are the skills that will lead to
  lifelong learning?
• Need for new skills to address workforce
  preparation too ability to adapt to teams,
  global and local diversity, knowledge explosion
  and knowledge transformation every 5 years
• Goal of education to support good citizenship,
  parenting, decision making on key policy issues,
  as well as deal with multiple careers
• Information literacy as the key to global
  competitiveness

13
Research Findings

• Two major National Science Foundation Studies
  How People Learn and Knowing What Students
  Know
• Deep learning and transferable knowledge are the
  goals requires student engagement in learning
  and multiple formats
• Requires stairways of learning building on
  previous work staged, sequential learning
• Strong need for alignment within course and
  programs

14
The WASC Learning Centered Model

• 3 stage process moves from one size fits all,
  summative approach to adaptive peer review
  approaches for all institutions even premiere
  institutions take the process seriously
• All institutions are engaged in assessing
  learning and addressed in a separate Educational
  Effectiveness Review
• Goal is transformation of institutions
• External Review Process its working

15
Similar Trends in Europe

• Bologna Accord, 1999
• -- to build a European area of higher
  education
• -- achieve greater compatibility and
  comparability of the systems of higher education
• -- promote citizens mobility and employability
  and
• -- increase the international competitiveness
  of the European system of higher education
  vis-à-vis the rest of the world
• Now includes 45 countries

16
Focus on Learning Outcomes

• Development and publication of explicit intended
  learning outcomes
• Assessment of students students should be
  assessed using published criteria, regulations
  and procedures which are applied consistently
• Student assessment is to be designed to measure
  the achievement of student learning outcomes and
  be undertaken by people who understand the role
  of assessment

17
Program Review Expectations

• Be conducted periodically for all programs
• Include external members
• Include a focus on student learning outcomes
• Include regular feedback from employers, labor
  market representatives
• Include student participation in QA activities

18
Questions, Comments

• For further information, please contact
• Ralph Wolff
• rwolff_at_wascsenior.org
• www.wascsenior.org