With about 150 accreditors in the US, 80 of them in education, few of us pay much attention to the accreditation seal which an organization might display. For high-profile educational institutions, we do not seem to care at all about their accreditation. We simply assume that a large university’s program in a certain subject is fully legitimate and certainly do not think of checking accreditation data before making our university decisions. Very soon this may be changing.
The Wall Street Journal’s front page article on Wednesday, March 22, 2023 “Colleges Fight a Famed Ranking” suggested that it is the accreditation-rich data collected by an accreditor that should be used by prospective students to educate themselves on their school choices, as universities in swift sequence show the door, or the finger, to U.S . News and its omnipresent rankings. “Presidents and deans say they already disclose many of those numbers to their accreditors and the federal government… Students need to go to one destination to be able to see comprehensive, accurate information from an independent third party that they trust.” It is difficult, if not impossible, to ignore the suggestive inclination.
Accreditation is primarily concerned with ensuring that educational institutions meet certain academic standards rather than making subjective, well-informed, or selective facts based, as the case may be, judgments about quality. However, once rankings are abandoned, there is a danger that accreditation could become a divisive and subjective marketing tool in the eyes of many. This could lead to a subjective interpretation of accreditation standards, with institutions prioritizing those that help them stand out rather than those that truly enhance the quality of their programs. And let us remember that accreditation is a communal affair by the institutions themselves who collaborate on establishing and enforcing accreditation standards.
It is not too difficult to foresee an opportunity for massive conflict, widely spread confusion, and frequent disappointment. The formality of the accreditation programs and their government sponsorship makes it easy to imagine a scenario when an accreditor is sued by disenchanted graduate failing to land the job of their dreams.
It is crucial to maintain the integrity of accreditation by ensuring that it remains objective, uniform, and focused on meeting academic standards rather than becoming a marketing tool. The accreditation field delivers a massive amount of good and has tremendous potential to continue helping the educational community advance and deliver better results. Accreditors do indeed collect massive amounts of data which can be very useful to many. However, accreditors must resist any attempts to turn them into ranking substitutes with implicit suggestions of university choices for an aspiring student, as this will rip out the accreditation core – an objective, uniform, data-driven application of mutually agreed standards to ensure uniformity in delivering quality education.