higher education accreditation: a look at the usa and japan
DESCRIPTION
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 - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Higher Education Accreditation: A Look at the USA and Japan
David WernerVisiting 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
Accreditation Experience as an Administrator 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
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) AccreditorsFive year review cycle Recognition provides
-status to the agency-makes students eligible for
Federal Financial AidMakes 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?
Resources ProcessesEducational
Outcomes
Historical Focus: Resources and Processes Resources:
Financial ResourcesNumber of Faculty, Faculty QualificationsSupport StaffQuality of StudentsLibrary ResourcesPhysical Facilities
Historical Focus: Resources and Processes
Processes: Graduation RequirementsCurriculumAcademic PoliciesStudent PoliciesStudent 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