Accreditation in the United States is most common for institutions of higher education.
1 We will spend a little time describing this process because it has recently become quite political and controversial, and even for those readers not involved in accreditation, the arguments illustrate the types of political issues and choices that often arise in any evaluation. These include disagreements over the purpose of the evaluation (formative or summative); the neutrality and inde- pendence of the experts or evaluators; the criteria to be used to judge the product and, thus, the data to be collected or reviewed; and the transparency of the process (what should be available to the public or other stakeholders outside the organi- zation). These controversies have emerged as the U.S. Department of Education, which has a stake in accreditation through provision of student loans to accred- ited institutions, has begun to take issue with the accreditation practices of the independent regional accrediting bodies that have traditionally reviewed colleges and universities for accreditation.
As noted earlier, in many countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, India, and the countries of the United Kingdom, institutions of higher education are required by law to be accredited. Government agencies, generally through a ministry or department of education, conduct the accreditation process. In some countries, such as Canada, there is no accreditation process for higher education, partly because most institutions of higher education are run by the provincial gov- ernments and that governance is considered to provide sufficient oversight. In the United States, accreditation evolved in a way that very much mirrors U.S. citizens’ distrust of government. With a desire to minimize government’s role nonprofit or voluntary associations carry out the accreditation tasks often fulfilled by government agencies in other countries.
As noted earlier, the New England Association of Schools and Colleges was the first accreditation organization in the United States. Originally established as a mechanism for dialogue between administrators of secondary schools and leaders of colleges in the region in 1885, it eventually evolved into the accrediting association for colleges and institutions in the region (Brittingham, 2009). Other regional associations followed, with each taking responsibility for accrediting institutions of higher education in their region. Today, there are six regional accrediting organiza- tions in the United States, each pursuing similar activities within their region.2 These
1Secondary institutions and school districts are occasionally accredited as well. Some states, for example, are moving to review school districts for accreditation and associations such as AdvancED have been formed out of the North Central and Southern accrediting associations for higher education to focus on accrediting K–12 schools. Further, many private schools are accredited. Our focus is on accreditation in higher education because it has been established for the longest period and its traditions, therefore, illus- trate much about expertise-oriented evaluation and its controversies. 2The major regional accrediting associations in the United States are the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, the Northwest Association of Accredited Schools, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, and the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. Although other accredit- ing organizations exist (for example, for religious institutions), these regional accrediting associations are considered the primary accrediting bodies in the United States.
132 Part II • Alternative Approaches to Program Evaluation
associations focus primarily on accrediting institutions of higher education, though often they are also involved in accrediting K–12 schools. Finally, there are many ac- crediting associations that review programs in particular disciplines rather than en- tire institutions. For example, the American Bar Association accredits law schools, the Association of American Medical Colleges accredits medical schools, and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) accredits teacher education programs, with the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) emerging as a recent competitor to NCATE.
Accreditation of institutions of higher education by the six regional associa- tions has followed a similar plan and approach, the mission-based approach, since the 1950s. With the mission-based approach, accreditors focus on the extent to which the institution is pursuing and achieving its stated mission. Although each association also has standards for higher education that it uses in the evaluation, the mission-based approach reflects the philosophy of the associations in its eval- uations. Barbara Brittingham describes the mission-based approach and the accreditation process in the United States as “unusually focused on the future” to help the institution improve (2009, p. 18).