By Eric Kelderman

Alexandria, Va.

The future of accreditation may have found its beginnings in a pastiche of pink, blue, and green sticky notes, pasted on a conference room wall at a Holiday Inn here today.

The paper was used to identify key issues and ideas that an advisory panel will consider as it develops recommendations to overhaul the nation's accreditation system. The panel consisted of seven of the 18 members of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, which will forward its recommendations on reforming accreditation to the education secretary, Arne Duncan, as soon as this fall.

Despite the ephemeral nature of the sticky notes, the issues the committee has begun to consider could have far-reaching effects for accreditors, who serve as gatekeepers to an estimated $150-billion of federal student aid, and the institutions that they approve. Several of the ideas that gained some currency at the meeting would completely overhaul the existing system, including:

• Decoupling accreditation from eligibility for federal student financial aid;
• Eliminating the geographic limitations of the six regional accreditors;
• Developing a tiered system of accreditation for various kinds of institutions, based on, perhaps, Carnegie Classification;
• Creating a separate consumer-protection agency that would be responsible for monitoring for-profit colleges.

Ralph A. Wolff, president of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, one of the nation's six regional accrediting organizations, said he was relieved by several suggestions to lessen the regulatory burden for accreditors and institutions, and glad that many of the presenters urged the committee to "do no harm" to the peer-review process that accreditors use to evaluate colleges.

Many committee members and speakers also emphasized that before any changes are made to accreditation, there should be a clear definition of the regulatory roles of accreditors, as well as state and federal governments, in deciding which entity is best suited to uphold consumer protections and academic integrity.

Collecting and reporting more data on student performance is another broad area that seemed to gain support from many committee members, as did requiring accreditors to be more open about their process.

But for now, all of the ideas are little more than scribbles on colored paper. The group will gather again in June and refine its possible recommendations.

"The goal really was to get some big ideas out on the table," said Rep. Cameron C. Staples, a Connecticut state legislator and chairman of the committee. "None of the issues that were raised were embraced" by the committee, he said.