AQIP and Accreditation: Improving Quality and Performance: Merely Getting Reaccredited Is Hardly a Mark of Distinction for Well-Operated Colleges and Universities

By Spangehl, Stephen D. | Planning for Higher Education, April-June 2012 | Go to article overview

AQIP and Accreditation: Improving Quality and Performance: Merely Getting Reaccredited Is Hardly a Mark of Distinction for Well-Operated Colleges and Universities


Spangehl, Stephen D., Planning for Higher Education


For the past 12 years, the Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP) has offered an innovative means for colleges and universities to maintain regional accreditation with the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), the only regional U.S. accrediting commission currently providing alternative pathways for maintaining accreditation. Although all HLC pathways assure that its accredited colleges and universities meet identical fundamental expectations, we designed AQIP specifically to infuse a culture of continuous quality improvement into colleges and universities through processes that provide evidence for accreditation. By aligning accreditation with the ongoing activities they execute to improve performance and by sharing their improvement results with AQIP, institutions develop the quality mindset critical to achieving the distinctive higher education mission they have set for themselves. At the same time, they generate the evidence that enables their accreditor to provide the public with assurance that they meet quality standards.

We developed AQIP in 1999 with a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts. Since its launch in 2000, it has grown steadily from its original 14 institutions to over 200 today. Its website, www.AQIP.org, lists the currently participating institutions and provides full details about AQIP's strategy forums, systems appraisals, principles, categories, and other elements.

Higher Education Accreditation Traditions

AQIP's distinctiveness is most visible when contrasting it with traditional accreditation. Historically, regional (or institutional) accreditation has served two very different ends: assuring and improving quality. Regional accreditation's roots lie in the formation of membership organizations that helped groups of institutions adopt common practices and definitions. These improved the quality of the weakest members, so quality improvement was always a major goal.

With the creation of the GI Bill following World War II, the federal government sought a mechanism to ensure that the benefits veterans received could be spent only in institutions of reasonable quality--not squandered in diploma mills or stolen by fly-by-night frauds--and quality assurance thus became a key function of accreditation. Since then, reservations about how well accreditors could perform this "gatekeeper" function of judging quality have grown steadily. The regional accreditors, in particular, evolved with a "wide tent" approach that welcomed a broad spectrum of institutions--diverse in who they serve, what programs they offer, and in the quality of their services, programs, and faculty. Most regional accreditors were not eager to reduce the number of institutions they accredited by establishing narrow or exclusive standards. Yet their lack of demanding standards was exactly what made it difficult for outsiders and governments to trust accreditation as quality assurance. Regionals have resisted habitual pressure for a ranking system, largely because ranking has never been popular with institutions. Everyone seems comfortable with accreditation that results in one of two decisions, accredited or unaccredited, with little room for more descriptive shades of grey and little public information explaining the decision.

In spite of tension between its quality assurance and quality improvement roles, traditional accreditation has accomplished much worth praising. It has provided a periodic self-study process in which all the members of a higher education institution can collectively and openly ask "What are we here for?" and "Are we doing what is essential for achieving our goals?" Accreditation regularly exposes an institution's practices to the scrutiny of peers from higher education's "community of practice." It provides opportunities for an institution's faculty and staff to serve as peer reviewers who scrutinize other institutions, thereby assimilating institutions and their employees to industry norms. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

AQIP and Accreditation: Improving Quality and Performance: Merely Getting Reaccredited Is Hardly a Mark of Distinction for Well-Operated Colleges and Universities
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.