U.S. Higher Education Accreditation and Academic Autonomy

Introduction: Accreditation and Academic Autonomy

The accreditation of higher education in the United States protects institutional academic autonomy to a limited extent. Accreditation is key to ensuring that students receive a quality education. Accrediting entities specify certain standards when evaluating universities, covering aspects such as course objectives, content, and requirements (Sandler, 2003). Institutions that do not meet or exceed those standards do not earn accreditation status. Many students recognize that universities offering quality educations hold some level of accreditation — often from multiple accrediting agencies. Thus, when analyzing the limited extent to which the accreditation of higher education in America protects academic autonomy, it is important to note that accreditation largely restricts academia to rigorous standards rather than simply granting it unmitigated autonomy. This tension is precisely why certain entities are calling for a "deregulation" (Dill, 2002, p. 1) of universities.

What Accrediting Agencies Actually Evaluate

It is vital to understand the degree of autonomy that formal academic institutions retain in spite of accreditation. Accrediting agencies do not necessarily dictate the particular curriculum that an institution of higher education adopts. They do not specify what scholarly material must be taught or how it must be implemented. Instead, accrediting agencies measure the overall "quality" (National Advisory, 2015) of university facilities. For instance, they evaluate the merit of a university's library, its classrooms, and the credentials of its professors. In this regard, the accrediting process actually affords institutions a fair amount of autonomy, allowing them considerable latitude in designing their curriculum. Accrediting agencies evaluate the overall effects of that curriculum, as well as the facilities in which it is implemented. They also scrutinize those who teach the curriculum to ensure that students earn a diploma that reflects their considerable time and effort (Eaton, 2015, p. 3).

How Accreditation Permits Curricular Freedom

There are aspects of accreditation that actually encourage autonomy among institutions of higher education in the United States. This is most clearly demonstrated by the role accrediting agencies play in the emergence of new and progressive disciplines, subjects, and areas of scholarship. Accrediting agencies could choose to revoke accreditation — or decline to renew it — when schools introduce progressive subject matter into their course offerings. If they routinely did so, far fewer new disciplines would be available to students. Instead, by permitting institutions to incorporate new subjects while maintaining their accreditation, accrediting agencies work in conjunction with academia to advance its various characteristics of scholarship.

Conclusion

Accrediting agencies support the broader evolution of higher education by evaluating and approving programs that meet the holistic needs of emerging fields and industries. Rather than functioning solely as a restrictive force, accreditation in U.S. higher education acts as a flexible quality-assurance mechanism — one that enforces meaningful standards while leaving institutions substantial freedom to innovate and adapt their curricula to a changing academic and professional landscape.

References

Dill, D. (2002). Allowing the market to rule: The case of the United States. Higher Education Quarterly, 57(2), 136–157.

Eaton, J. (2015). An overview of U.S. accreditation. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.

Sandler, R. B. (2003). Accreditation of universities in the U.S.A. Retrieved from www.rbs2.com

U.S. Department of Education. National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity. Retrieved from www.ed.gov