Us perspectives on educational quality assessment and accreditation
1 / 17

US Perspectives on Educational Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

US Perspectives on Educational Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation. A Presentation Dr. Joseph G. Burke Fulbright Specialist, Thailand June 2013. Outline. Describe US values & impact on quality Outline US quality movement Rationale and history Describe US Approach

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'US Perspectives on Educational Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation' - aubrey-allen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Us perspectives on educational quality assessment and accreditation

US Perspectives on Educational Quality, Assessment, and Accreditation

A Presentation

Dr. Joseph G. Burke

Fulbright Specialist, Thailand

June 2013

Outline Accreditation

  • Describe US values & impact on quality

  • Outline US quality movement

    • Rationale and history

  • Describe US Approach

  • Questions and Answers

Fundamental american values
Fundamental American Values Accreditation

  • Three Scales

    - FREEDOM v order

    - INDIVIDUAL v society

    - LIMITED v powerful government

  • Strong belief in market approach to societal issues

  • Values influenced:

    • Constitution: Federal system and separation of powers

    • Government policy regarding education & accreditation

    • Others: health care, gun control

Us higher education context
US Higher Education Context Accreditation

  • No powerful ministry of education

  • Who’s in Charge?

    • Feds provide some financial support and broad policy outlines

    • State/local governments provide financial support and regulation

    • Multiple non-governmental groups provide “participatory” rule making regimes: commissions, associations, agencies, boards

Implications Accreditation

  • US higher education system highly diverse & decentralizedw/autonomous institutions

  • Overlapping funding/regulatory structures

  • Multiple organizations involved in accreditation

  • Yet system:

    • “best in the world” reputation

    • protects academic freedom

    • Encourages innovative and critical thinking w/entrepreneurial and highly successful graduates

Quality assessment us history
Quality Assessment US History Accreditation

  • (1983) “A Nation at Risk” report of Reagan era

    • Decline in learning standards versus rising costs

  • (1985) “Time for Results” examination of HE

  • (1985-2000) – Rise of Assessment Movement

    • Phase I – Total Quality Procedures inherited from

      Industry (Processes and Industrial- type Awards)

    • Phase II – Data Compilation

    • Phase III – Big Question, comparative, and Internationalization Stage

    • Phase IV -Current

  • 2000 – Growing concern US education system less competitive.

    • Growing federal intervention

Why assessment movement
Why Assessment Movement? Accreditation

  • Atmosphere of accountability

  • Increased competition in academic marketplace

  • Constrained fiscal condition requires evidence-based academic management

  • Technology provides increased capacity to generate, compile, present, and analyze evidence

    • Use of “Dashboards” (analytics)

  • Industry provides better management techniques

The us approach

The US APPROACH Accreditation

Institutional accreditation
Institutional Accreditation Accreditation

  • Responsibility

    • Independent regional commissions elected by members

      • Federal government periodically reviews performance

  • Comprehensive focus

    • Resources, governance, faculty qualifications, instructional quality, student performance

  • Consequence of institutional failure

    • Elimination of eligibility to participate in federal student aid and financial loan programs

Programmatic accreditation
Programmatic Accreditation Accreditation

  • Responsibility

    • Commissions chosen by professional membership associations

    • Some states involved in program approval

  • Dual Focus

    • Faculty qualifications, curriculum, student performance

    • Level of Institutional support

  • Consequences of failure dependent on professions

Accreditation process
Accreditation Process Accreditation

  • Comprehensive Self Study by institution

  • Multiday visit by peers, w/report & recommendations

  • Institution comments

  • Commission action

    • Accredit

    • Accredit with warning and reporting requirement

    • Not Accredit

  • Appeal Process

Questions for university council and administrative leadership
Questions for University Council and Administrative Leadership

  • How Good is our Product

    • What a student knows and can do upon graduation?

    • What is the “value added” by the learning process?

  • How good are we at producing our product?

    • -retention and graduation rates

  • Are our customers satisfied?

  • Do we have the right mix?

  • Do we make the grade? (Accreditation)

Summary Leadership

  • Based Upon American Value System

  • De-centralized w/multiple actors and approaches

  • Focused on Student Development and Learning

  • Quality approach Emphasizes formative evaluation and continuous improvement

  • Accreditation based upon summative evaluation of

    • Resource availability

    • Program qualifications and results

    • Assessment process

Comparison of us and other approaches to quality
Comparison of US and Other Approaches to Quality Leadership

  • US tends to disaggregate quality and risk management functions

  • US less focused on comparative rankings

  • US has far more diversified and de-centralized approach

  • Each approach has strengths and weaknesses

  • US accreditation/educational system under review

    • National concerns about quality, competitiveness, effectiveness of meeting changing occupational requirements

Agb resources
AGB Resources Leadership

  • Peter T. Ewell, Making the Grade, Second Edition, AGB Press, 2012.

  • “AGB Statement on Board Responsibility for the Oversight of Educational Quality, AGB Press, 2011.

  • “How Boards Oversee Educational Quality: A Report on a Survey on Boards and the Assessment of Student Learning,” AGB Press, 2010.