The Role of Accreditation of Higher Education Institutions

Online Education, Accrediting Standards, and Student Success: An Examination of the Relationship Between the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges Standards for Online Education and Student Success

“…Institutional accreditation is conferred by regional accrediting bodies whereas program accreditation is typically conferred by specialized accrediting bodies that evaluate disciplines such as engineering, law, business, teacher education, and medicine. The goal of both types of accreditation is to ensure that the quality of education offered by an institution or its program is of an acceptable standard (Eaton, 2008). In some instances, an overlap of accrediting responsibilities may occur between regional accrediting bodies and specialized bodies when programs under the jurisdiction of specialized accreditation are offered through universities and colleges that are under the jurisdiction of regional accrediting bodies.…”

“…Consequently, an improper balance between input and output measures can generate failure in quality management initiatives (Eaton, 2008). Therefore, the way that universities measure and respond to system inputs, outputs, and outcomes need to be monitored closely to ensure that quality enhancement occurs, thus ensuring a higher degree of effectiveness.…”

“…In accountability, there is an underlying assumption that the agents (individuals or organizations fulfilling the mandate of the principal) are duty-bound to function within acceptable parameters of performance and behavior set by the principal, and that the principal will impose sanctions if the agents choose to act in a contrary manner (Grant & Keohane, 2005). The purpose of accountability is threefold: ensuring that the agent acts in ways prescribed by and acceptable to the principal or stakeholders, assuring the quality of a product, and ensuring there is value for money (Eaton, 2008;Grant & Keohane, 2005).…”

“…Every college and university stands to benefit from having a rigorous internal quality assurance process (Anderson et al, 2009). These benefits include new or continued funding by the federal government, an image of credibility within the academy, and a higher degree of public confidence by stakeholders (Eaton, 2008;Parker, 2012).…”

“…In contrast, external quality assurance refers to the systems and practices established and conducted by a legitimate approved body that seeks to validate the quality of a college or university. The goal of external and internal quality assurance is to assure stakeholders that the institution and its programs have met or exceeded threshold standards (Eaton, 2008).…”