Accreditors Agonistes

Wednesday, January 16, at 12 noon, U.S. Eastern time

Judith S. Eaton is president of the umbrella group the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. She was formerly chancellor of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system.

A transcript of the chat follows.

Question from Paul Basken:
    Welcome to the Chronicle's Colloquy with Judith Eaton! We're ready to start taking questions for Ms. Eaton, president of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. We'll begin with a few that arrived just before the start of the Colloquy, then keep adding new questions as they come in. Good afternoon, Ms. Eaton!

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi, there. I am looking forward to our exchanges.

Question from Margaret Weck, President, Human Anatomy & Physiology Society:
    There are many professional organizations consisting of specialists in particular fields and disciplines. Those organizations could provide guidelines on course content; many societies already publish such standards. Why aren't discipline-specific academic and professional societies used as resources by regional accreditors when evaluating a program or school, or when determining the suitability of faculty credentials?

Judith S. Eaton:
    My sense is that a number of accreditors do look to expectations established by a profession or discipline when both writing accreditation standards and applying them. However, accreditors do not routinely adopt standards from other organizations because this raises a number of problems for the accrediting organizations. Thanks.

Question from Ray Parker, Vassar College:
    I believe in economics there is a concept called something like opportunity cost. Basically, I think it has something to do with what an organization isn't able to do because it chose to spend resources doing something else. Has anyone ever measured the opportunity cost because of the resources being spent on designing/evaluating/modifying/revaluating/redesigning programs to create so-called improved learning outcomes?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Am not aware of such a study. My take on your question is that you may think that working on outcomes is not as valuable as other institutional or faculty efforts. Do think that attention to student achievement is important, although there are many debates about how to do this and do it well. Thanks.

Question from Jerry Haenisch, Online doctoral student:
    With the rise of global delivery of education, what are the prospects of creating a government recognized global accrediting system to simplify credit transfer between international schools?

Judith S. Eaton:
    I have sat through many discussions of this issue! My take is that we need to move forward here through colleges and universities working together to agree on expectations about quality and expressing this through accreditation standards. This is preferable to a government-based approach. Thank you.

Question from Stan Dura, U. Nevada, Las Vegas:
    How do you envision Student Affairs divisions, and the traditional departments within them, measuring student learning resulting from their efforts?

Judith S. Eaton:
    The national student affairs organization (National Association of Student Personnel Administrators) has been focusing on this issue for some time - seeking to integrate robust accountability into student affairs. If you haven't done so, suggest that you check their Website (www.naspa.org). Thank you.

Question from Joanna Burnside, Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College:
    Three questions: What types of assessment do you think will be the most accepted by accreditors? Should colleges consider assessing one class in multiple ways? How can colleges improve faculty buy-in -- a positive attitude toward -- the idea of increased assessment and the need for accurate results? -- In other words, what are some ideas that would help create a positive faculty reaction toward increased assessment requirements?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Three answers! 1. My view is that accreditors should not prescribe specific assessment approaches, but examine whether whatever approach an institution is using, it provides adequate evidence of student learning. 2. If multiple assessment provides enhanced evidence with regard to student learning (and it is feasible to do) - yes. 3. This, to me, is one of the toughest issues we face. We can benefit from distinguishing evidence of student learning (which I view as a faculty domain) from evidence of institutional performance (which needs to involve administration as well). My sense is that a fair amount of the difficulty results from confusing these - with the result that faculty believe that the institution is inappropriately intruding. This is the best I can do in this short time.

Question from Jo Pennington, Ohio Valley University:
    If higher education will not be required to use standardized tests, are you anticipating a requirement for a structured, campus-wide assessment system such as NCATE uses or is consideration being given to a system like that of the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC), with an open structure for claims and supporting evidence of quality?

Judith S. Eaton:
    I am not aware of any such efforts or any initiatives in this area.

Question from Gail Levy, Leeward Community College, University of Hawaii, small (5,000-6,000 students) community college:
    I teach the ubiquitous "Freshman English/Composition" course, and while there are various and conflicting views of what should be taught and learned in this course, there seems to be more consensus about "industry standards" and "best practices" and how to measure whatever student learning outcomes are being determined by individual institutions (e.g., direct writing samples and rubrics rather than computerized multiple choice tests). I am curious if there is a consensus among the accrediting agencies about the assessment tools, practices, data, etc. that should be used to measure the effectiveness of programs and institutions, whether or not these "best practices" are explicitly stated in the accreditation guidelines. There seems to be a heavy emphasis on quantitative data, but little qualitative data are being collected and analyzed at my institution. I wonder what kinds of qualitative data are being used to answer what kinds of questions at other institutions.

Judith S. Eaton:
    As you know, accreditation is a quite decentralized enterprise. While all recognized accreditors call for good assessment, the judgments about what tools and practices are effective vary considerably. So - I am answering "no" to consensus. And, I question whether there is a need for consensus. Some accreditors do address "best practices" and others do not. It would be a considerable task, but examining accreditation standards, policies and guidelines would provide information here.

Question from Alan Contreras, State of Oregon:
    Judith, should regional accreditors play an active role in external qualitative oversight of individual degree programs (e.g., History, Spanish literature) that don't have a specialized programmatic accreditor? If not, who should do this, or should it be done at all?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi, Alan. This would turn regional accreditors into programmatic accreditors as well. As you know, this would be a complete re-tooling of what they do! Do we need accreditation for all the disciplines and fields for which it presently does not exist? I am not at all sure we do. I like the ways in which the various professional associations have, as part of their academic responsibility, established standards and expectations. I would rather work through these groups than accreditation. I take your point about the need for some external review of some sort. We're debating over how....

Question from Liz Reisberg, Boston College:
    Hello, Dr. Eaton. How useful do you think it is to compare institutions? Sec. Spellings has put a lot of emphasis on making comparative data available.

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi. We do a fair amount of comparing of institutions now and we don't hear a lot of complaints. We compare price, student aid availability, facilities, faculty - for starters. And, although they are heavily criticized, we have various rankings such as U.S. News. While I believe that it is up to institutions to take action - and only if they deem it appropriate - in this area, students could benefit from understanding more about institutional performance when exploring options for attendance at colleges and universities.

Question from Debra, Jackson State University:
    In response to the great emphasis on student learning and performance, I fear that some colleges and universities focus more on public perception of their effectiveness rather than on actual student learning. How can we address the apprehensiveness of smaller and less reputable institutions about reporting accurate and complete data which may show our students and institutions in a less than favorable light?

Judith S. Eaton:
    It is very hard to compete with prestige and branding.... However, I do believe that we serve the public interest, including students, when we provide reliable information to them about our colleges and universities. "Less favorable" is in the eyes of the beholder. And, enrollments at most higher education institutions are quite robust. I think that there is a good deal of demand for the broad spectrum of our institutions and that this will continue.

Question from Scott Mattingly, DeSales University/Temple University:
    Hi Judith, I believe in the accreditation process as a valuable tool through which experienced peers can offer important feedback to each other. Yet, I can also see why the public would call into question the integrity of the process given the inevitable connections between accreditors and institutions, which still exist in spite of checks and balances. How can we maintain our useful system, but improve these checks and balances?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi, Scott. I think that our checks and balances work when we assure minimum conflict of interest. Some examples: accreditation teams have appropriate independence from the institutions and programs they review; accreditation decision-making bodies (commissions) assure that members recuse themselves as appropriate when the commissions are deciding on accreditation status; the accreditor has open and full due process in the case of appeals, etc.; there is adequate "transparency" - information to the institution and the public about what is going on.

Question from Beth Donohue, New York Chiropractic College:
    What role do you see the Baldrige National Quality Program Awards playing in the future of accreditation?

Judith S. Eaton:
    My take is that Baldrige has, for some time, been a model for some accreditors when it comes to developing standards and process. I really don't have enough information about the Awards program to say more....

Question from Beth Donohue, Director of Accreditation:
    To follow-up on Jerry Haenisch's question relating to creating a government recognized global accrediting system to simplify credit transfer between international schools, do you see the 6 US regional accrediting agencies becoming one?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Not in the near future.

Question from Charlie Lenth, SHEEO organization:
    Please expand on your response to the question by Jerry Haenisch. The online Presidents' Forum has establish some expectations for reporting quality measures at their institutions, but this does not appear to have solved the "problem." They still face different accreditation standards across states, to say nothing of the maze of state regs. And they represent only the highest quality online providers. Are you saying all governments, including the states should back away from this?

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi, Charlie. I do think that we will be moving more toward "national" and "international" institutional quality standards in the future. However, I would prefer to see these emerge from our colleges and universities and not government. Yes, government (including the states) have a role here, but I would like to see this framed in terms of holding institutions accountable for their performance, not setting the standards for the performance of individual institutions. We need more discussion, I know, on how to put this together.

Question from Gary Brown, Washington State University:
    A key force behind the accountability push is purportedly public concern. If we accept as reasonable expectations for accountability, where can we find reports that provide us with more detail about those public concerns, particularly those that point to the need for student learning outcomes?

Judith S. Eaton:
    The Association of American Colleges and Universities here in Washington DC has done research here. You might check the Website ( www.aacu.org ). Chambers of Commerce have done research as well. These will likely lead you other sources. While some will raise questions here, the Secretary's Commission on the Future of Higher Education's papers ( http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports.html ) include attention to this.

Question from Carol, small public university:
    In the same vein as the question concerning Student Affairs divisions, how do you envision academic libraries assessing the impact their efforts have on student learning outcomes?

Judith S. Eaton:
    I haven't done any work on this, but suggest that you check with the American Library Association and their accrediting commission.

Question from Carole, Board of Governors, State University System of Florida:
    The Board of Governors in Florida has promulgated a regulation requiring Academic Learning Compacts(ALCs)and Related Assessment Processes. The goal is to support a culture of identification of desired student learning outcomes and appropriate assessment strategies to measure outcomes. There has been faculty push back. However, there are those faculty, new and senior alike, who analyze their instructional goals, think about how to assess them, and then celebrate the results. Reports of improved student evaluations and ability to identify barriers and make improvement are the most often cited results. We try very hard to align ALCs with QER and accreditation so that these processes support and enhance each other thus simplifying the work of the faculty and evaluation personnel. The effort continues and is gaining visibility. My question is, what do you think about the value of pre- and post-testing to demonstrate gains in knowledge and skills, not just in individual courses, but for incoming majors and graduating seniors? A dean of a large college in one of our universities and I spoke of this at length. Do you think that a discipline related pretest given to incoming majors (juniors) and then again during their last term prior to graduation would provide valid evidence of learning outcomes as a result of course work during their major studies?

Judith S. Eaton:
    I am not schooled in testing. From a common sense perspective, I do believe that it is reasonable to have interventions that answer "What did students learn?" - although I do not have the background to suggest what the interventions might be.

Question from George Gollin, University of Illinois:
    Hi Judith, Externally mandated assessments of students in some kinds of programs might be difficult to define in a fashion that is independent of the fine details of the target university's curriculum and expectations. Examples that come to mind include performance-oriented fields like Dance. Has there been significant discussion of the discipline-specific hurdles associated with assessment of some of the undergraduate majors we offer at our universities? thanks--

Judith S. Eaton:
    Hi, George. Yes, agree about it being difficult. Other than conversations indicating that there are hurdles, I have not heard much else. This is why I think that assessment needs to emerge from within the institution (or field or discipline) rather than being driven solely by external mandates.

Question from Paul Basken:
     It's been a great hour-plus, and we're grateful to Judith for taking the time today to answer our readers' questions. Good afternoon, and thanks again to Judith and all our participants!

Judith S. Eaton:
    Paul thank you and all who participated. Hope to see everyone at the CHEA Annual Conference here in Washington on January 28-30!