Readers of Academic Leader will know from recent essays of mine that I have some reservations about the efficacy of the accreditation process. The myriad accreditation agencies—both regional and subject specialties—create a ton of paperwork for institutions of higher learning, and their emphasis on standards-evidence-quantitative assessment can be both costly and burdensome while undermining creative learning and “the joy of teaching.” But I promised an essay in praise of accreditations.

In spite of their cost and inconvenience, accreditations are often able to bring needed reforms to higher education. Most of the accrediting agencies with which I am familiar are staffed by knowledgeable professionals who are dedicated to strengthening colleges and universities by well-defined and articulated standards. Accrediting teams themselves bring to our campuses highly-motivated and skilled colleagues focused on finding what is good and right and proper in our institutions. I am confident that regional accrediting commissions are indeed committed to preserving the integrity of academic degrees and ensuring that the credentials of faculty and staff are appropriate.

Furthermore, most accrediting agencies provide training for evaluators and promote innovation, self-assessment, and diversity within the academy. As Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, president of the Commission on Colleges for the Southern Association, put it in a recent message to the membership: “Regional accreditation has had a significant impact on higher education and has internal mechanisms and external engagements to continue to do so. . .to ensure the quality of the institutions that operate within their borders.”

Now, you might ask, why is McDaniel praising accreditations? For two reasons:
1. The truth is, regional and specialty subject accreditations have a long history of competent, dedicated, professional service to higher education. Whatever their drawbacks, such agencies do their job with care and commitment.
2. We are now looking at the U.S. Secretary of Education’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education and its efforts to bring a “No Child Left Behind” standard-issue, test-driven accountability to higher education. As Wheelan points out in her message this commission “might recommend radical reforms that undermine a system that has a proven history of being able to change as needed [or] it might ignore the uniqueness of accreditation as a self-regulatory process of peers. . . .”

Will Rogers opined, “Be thankful we are not getting all the government we are paying for.” Do we really want a “one size fits all” new federal accreditation system to govern all higher education in the United States (public and private) by way of a massive new bureaucracy? I don’t think so—how about you?

Thomas R. McDaniel is a professor of education, senior vice president, and acting dean of graduate studies at Converse College in Spartanburg, S.C. Contact him at Tom.McDaniel@Converse.edu.

Thomas R McDaniel is a regular contributor to the monthly newsletter Academic Leader. Academic Leader covers all topics related to improving the leadership of academic decision-makers. Click here to see snippets of all of the articles featured in the current issue.