When this issue of BPD Update was planned, it was anticipated that there would be a draft of the new EPAS available for review by this time.  This has not yet occurred.  Therefore, it may be helpful for us as baccalaureate social work educators to look at the larger context of accreditation to learn a bit more about the context within which the new standards will be developed.  Much of that context comes from the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) describes itself as "a national advocate and institutional voice for self-regulation of academic quality through accreditation.  CHEA is an association of 3,000 degree-granting colleges and universities and recognizes 60 institutional and programmatic accrediting organizations" (http://www.chea.org/pdf/chea_glance_2006.pdf, accessed 5/21/07)

CHEA has established recognition standards to guide accreditors in their development of standards, indicating that accreditation processes should "advance academic quality", "demonstrate accountability", "encourage self-scrutiny and planning for change", "employ appropriate and fair procedures in decision making", "demonstrate ongoing review of accreditation practice" and "possess sufficient resources".  (http://www.chea.org/pdf/chea_glance_2006.pdf, accessed 5/21/07). 

CHEA provides quality assurance standards to its participating accrediting organizations.  These organizations are divided into four categories:  Regional Accreditors, Faith-based Accreditors, Private Careen Accreditors, and Programmatic Accreditors.  Social Work Education fits within the last of these categories.  Accreditation plays four key roles in higher education:  assuring quality; access to federal and state funds; assure private employers and donors of the status of an educational program; and making it easier for students to transfer between institutions.  (Eaton, 2006, http://www.chea.org/pdf/OverviewAccred_rev0706.pdf, accessed 5/21/07)

Values inherent in higher education, according to CHEA, include the importance of:  maintaining quality; the role of the institutional mission in judging quality; and maintaining institutional autonomy; academic freedom; decentralization and diversity of institutions and their missions.

CHEA maintains that accrediting bodies must be accountable to the programs and institutions that they accredit.  Through CHEA, accrediting organizations are themselves reviewed through a process called "recognition".  Since accrediting bodies make decisions that in turn determine a program or institution's ability to apply for and receive government funding and/or student aid, the United States Department of Education (USDE) requires that accreditation processes have standards for "student achievement, curricula, faculty, facilities..., fiscal and administrative capacity, student support services, recruiting and admissions practices, measures of the degree and objectives of degrees or credentials offered, record of student complaints and record of compliance with program responsibilities for student aid..." (Eaton, 2006, http://www.chea.org/pdf/OverviewAccred_rev0706.pdf, accessed 5/21/07)

In the accreditation process, there is often some difference of opinion between University Presidents and accrediting bodies regarding accreditation standards and processes.  Thus, in 2006, CHEA completed a study in which thirty College and University Presidents were interviewed regarding their views on accreditation.  Although the Presidents agreed on the value of accreditation, there were several areas of concern that they raised about accreditation processes.  These concerns included the view that some specialized accrediting bodies express a narrow point of view, that site teams and site team leaders arre not consistent in their approach, that some accreditation processes include very specific checklists, that accreditation is expensive and time-consuming, that accreditation works well if it is seen as an opportunity and works poorly is it is seen as a burden, and that the current trend toward outcomes assessment is a fad that should not be followed.  Presidents agreed that accreditation processes were helpful when they addressed curriculum issues and program improvement, but were not helpful when they concentrated on the investment of additional resources.  (CHEA, 2006, http://www.chea.org/pdf/CHEAMonograph_Apr06.pdf, accessed 5/21/07)

It is within this context that CHEA sets standards for accreditation.  These standards apply to all accrediting bodies, including the Council on Social Work Education.  CHEA places current emphasis on the importance of both quality assurance and quality improvement.  Thus the current EPAS looks closely at programs in terms of their missions, goals, objectives, and measurable outcomes.  There is also an emphasis on programmatic processes that enable ongoing assessment, feedback, and program renewal. (Eaton, 2006, http://www.chea.org/pdf/OverviewAccredSlideshow_0706.pdf, accessed 5/21/07)  It is likely that there will be an increased emphasis on these areas in the new EPAS, in response to the ongoing emphasis that CHEA has placed on these concerns.

With the move toward evidence-based practice that is evident in social work and other professions, we can also expect to see an increased emphasis placed on the development of student competencies in the new standards.  There will be less emphasis on “inputs” and more emphasis on “outcomes”. 

As the new EPAS is developed, BPD Update will provide members with more information on the new standards.

Bibliography

CHEA (2006).  Accreditation Serving the Public Interest.  Concil on Higher Education Accreditation, Washington, DC, http://www.chea.org/pdf/CHEAMonograph_Apr06.pdf, accessed 5/21/07

CHEA Institute for Research and Study of Accreditation and Quality Assurance (2006).  Presidential Perspectives on Accreditation:  A Report of the CHEA Presidents Project.  Council on Higher Education Accreditation, Washington, DC,  http://www.chea.org/pdf/CHEAMonograph_Apr06.pdf, accessed 5/21/07.

Eaton, J. S. (2006).  Accreditation and Recognition in the United States.  Council on Higher Education Accreditation, Washington, DC,  http://www.chea.org/pdf/OverviewAccredSlideshow_0706.pdf, accessed 5/21/07.

Eaton, J.S. (2006).  An Overview of U.S. Accreditation.  Council on Higher Education Accreditation, Washington, DC.,  http://www.chea.org/pdf/CHEAMonograph_Apr06.pdf, accessed 5/21/07.