Overview
Quality Assurance System
in Higher Education

UNITED STATESOF AMERICA
Second edition (2016)

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

Overview of the Quality Assurance System in Higher Education
United States of America

First edition published in March 2010
Second edition published in January 2016

1-29-1 Gakuen-Nishimachi, Kodaira, Tokyo 187-8587 Japan
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation
http://www.niad.ac.jp/english
kokusai@niad.ac.jp

Sharing this Overview to any other interested parties is allowed if
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation
acknowledged and used for non-commercial purposes.

NIAD-UE
January 2016

NIAD-UEPDF file available at: http://www.niad.ac.jp/english/overview_us2_e.pdf
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

-U

is

2

Introduction

In addition to its core activities of university evaluation, awarding of degrees and research activities, the National
Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation (NIAD-UE) is working closely with domestic andoverseas quality assurance agencies, including those having advanced higher education systems and close ties
with Japan, to gain the trust of the international community in Japanese higher education and promoteinternational collaboration among higher education institutions (HEIs).
As each country possesses different political, societal, cultural and language element, the structure of its quality
assurance system for higher education also differs.

In building relationships and realizing effective cooperationthat transcend suchexchanging accurate information on their respective quality assurance and higher education systems.

This

mindset is important when HELs provide an effectively quality-assured collaborative program.
In this context, International Affairs Division of NIAD-

as a means for

publishing comprehensive information on higher education and quality assurance systems in Japan and othercountries.

We have so far compiled information of Japan, United States of America, United Kingdom, Australia,

the Netherlands, France, Korea, China, and Germany.
Unlike most countries, the U.S. has no centralized Ministry of Education to enforce national standards.

While

academic autonomy is widely practiced, formal, official oversight is performed by the federal government, states
and accreditors.

The federal government recognizes accreditors through whose accreditation the quality ofhigher education institutions is assured.

State governments, in the meantime, review institutions for state

licensure and/or state authority to operate.
for their funding.

Also, state-owned institutions are dependent on state legislatures

Accreditation was originally begun as a voluntary activity among higher education

institutions and is still be considered to be a reliable authority on academic quality by federal and state
governments.

Quality assurance in the U.S. higher education, thus, consists of activities by those three players(i.e. the federal government, states and accreditors) which are often referred to as triad .
This Overview was based on a variety of information regarding higher education and quality assurance inhigher education in the United States.

First published in 2010, it has been revised with the latest data and trend

as Overview of the Quality Assurance System in Higher Education: the United States of America (second
edition) in both English and Japanese.

The newest edition is based on desk research conducted between 2014

and 2015.
Upon completion of the document, we would like to thank everyone who gave us useful comments andsuggestions. Especially the biggest thanks to Ms. Linda Suskie, the former vice president of the Middle States
Commission on Higher Education, who made the content a lot better with her broad knowledge and cheerfulcomments.
January 2016
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

3

Index

I. Basic information of the country

5

II. The higher education system
1. Historical overview of U.S. higher education

6

2. Diagram of the educational system in the United States of America

7

3. Type and size of higher education institutions

8

4. Student admission

9

5. Higher education credentials

10

6. Federal and local governments

14

7. Related organizations

15

8. Management and student engagement in higher education institutions

16

9. Tuition17

10. Student aid

17

11. Higher education laws

18

III. The quality assurance system
1. Historical overview

20

2. Introduction

22

3. Type of quality assurance system

25

3-1. Accreditation25

3-2. Recognition of accrediting organizations

29

3-3. State quality review of higher education

31

4. Legitimate higher education institutions

32

5

33

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

4

Map of the United States of America

Reference:∘ Wikimedia Commons (2015) Map of USA with state names 2,
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_USA_with_state_names.svg#/media/File:Map_of_USA_with_state_names_2.svg [30 Oct
2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

5

I

Basic information of the country

Name of country/region

United States of America

CapitalWashington D.C.

Major language

EnglishPopulation (Dec 2015)

321,368,864

Nominal GDP (2013)

16,776,800,000,000 USD

Nominal GDP per capita (2013)

53,101 USD

Public expenditure on education as a %All levels of education: 13.6% (12.9%), Tertiary education: 3.5% (3.2%)of total public expenditure (2011)(OECD averages)

Public expenditure on education as a %All levels of education: 5.1% (5.6%), Tertiary education: 1.3% (1.4%)

of GDP (2011)

Annualexpenditure(OECD averages)
perstudent

inby educational institutions

tertiary education (2011)by the government

26,021 USD

9,057 USD

5,402 USD (Public institutions)

Estimated annual average tuition feesst

(1 degree programmes, 2011)17,163 USD (Independent private institutions)

Progression rate into higher education

74%(incl. both full-time and part-time students in two- and four-year(2010)

institutions)

Organization of education system

See II-2 Diagram of the educational system

Cycle of academic year

September to May/June

Sources:∘

EP Nuffic (2013) Country module - United States, Jan 2013, Available:
http://www.nuffic.nl/en/library/country-module-united-states.pdf [30 Mar 2015] p. 4∘

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (2014)

United States of America, 11 Sep 2014, Available:

http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/usa/data.html [30 Mar 2015]∘

OECD (2014) Education at a Glance 2014: IECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Available:
http://www.oecd.org/edu/Education-at-a-Glance-2014.pdf [20 Apr 2015], pp. 215, 249, 257, 271∘

U.S. Census Bureau for the United States (2015) U.S. and World Population Clock, Available: http://www.census.gov/popclock/ [3Dec 2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

6

II

The higher education system

1. Historical overview of U.S. higher education
During the colonial era, the colleges, e.g. Harvard (founded in 1636), William and Mary (1693), and Yale
(1701), were established as adjuncts of their respective churches, which meant facility with classical language,
grounding in the basic philosophies of Aristotle, and a smattering of general worldly knowledge. The
curriculum of the colleges in this era aimed to provide students with a liberal education. The founding
documents of all three schools speak to the aim of educating ministers.

In the latter half of the 18th century, after the U.S. independence, the newly sovereign states made provision forcollegiate education for their citizens. States that had no colleges chartered new institutions. The Morrill
Land-Grant Act of 1862 allowed many states to receive land to build colleges to help promote economic andcivic development in the states.

The balance of postsecondary study in the United States during the 19th century comprised several types: thegroups of colleges and universities to be engaged in higher learning, e.g., private liberal arts colleges, publicresearch universities which developed under the Morrill Act, state normal schools which nurture elementaryand secondary school teachers, and seminaries which prepared priests or ministers. Another importantdevelopment was what is now called the Historically Black College or University (HBCU). They were foundedby states and religious denominations for African-Americans who could not attend many colleges because ofsegregation.

During 1920s, an expansion in enrollments triggered quantitative changes analogous to what Martin Trowwould later identify as the transition from elite to mass higher education. The period between 1945 and 1975
was the most expansive in the American experience (1950: 2.7 million students; 1960: 3.6 million; 1970: 7.9
million). After World War II, the Ser
education a national priority. In the 1960s and 1970s, the launching and rapid growth of community colleges,
offering two-

further expanded postsecondary education

opportunities.

in these years. The federal investment inhigher education increased significantly in the 1970s, with the new funds being used to support student accessthrough grants and loans to students. Direct support for research remained at high levels, and, eventually,
expanded once more in the 1980s.

Higher education is highly diversified in the 21st century from public to private, four-year to two-year,
not-for-profit to for-profit institutions. In the meantime, more than sixty percent of students enrolled are now
over twenty-five years old and an approximately same proportion is also working full-time; compared to a
traditional model of full-time students between eighteen and twenty-three years old entering directly after

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

7

secondary school. Such a situation reflects an increasing demand for middle-skill jobs which require more thana high school diploma. Furthermore, as many state budgets strain under debt loads, states reduction on theirsupport to colleges and universities has triggered a trend of rising costs of higher education for individuals;
including those of textbooks and tuition.
Sources:∘ Altbach, P.G., Gumport, P.J. and Berdahl, R.O. (1998) American Higher Education in the Twenty-first Century, Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press, pp.39-43, 57, 64∘ Ewell, P.T. (2008) U.S. Accreditation and the Future of Quality Assurance: A Tenth Anniversary Report from the Council for Higher

Education Accreditation, Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation, pp.17-21, 28, 48∘ Staley, D.J. & Trinkle, D.A. (2011) The Changing Landscape of Higher Education, Educause review, Available:
http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/changing-landscape-higher-education [24 Mar 2015]

2. Diagram of the educational system in the United States of America

Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2012) Digest of Education Statistics: 2012, Available:
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d12/figures/fig_01.asp?referrer=figures [30 Mar 2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

8

3. Type and size of higher education institutions
Types of higher education institutions
Higher education institutions are divided into either public or private. Private institutions consist of non-profit
and for-profit entities. Whereas, those institutions can also be divided into two-year and four-year institutions;the former mainly provide less-than-degree programs and the latter degree programs. There are vocational
institutions called career schools majority of which are for-profit organizations.

Higher education institutions in the United States are organized and licensed or chartered as not-for-profit orfor-profit corporations, regardless of whether they are public or private. These corporate entities are governedby boards of trustees, who are citizens appointed by a governor or legislature (public institutions) or elected by
the board itself (private institutions).

Public institutions, in addition to having governing boards typically appointed by state authorities, will also
receive some annual allocation of state budget funds.

Private institutions are independent of state control even though they are licensed or authorized by state
governments. They may be non-profit or for-profit, and may be secular or affiliated with a religious community.
Some private institutions may be authorized by state governments to receive state operating funds and toprovide some public services.

Source:∘ Eckel, P.D. & King, J.E. (2004) An Overview of Higher Education in the United States: Diversity, Access, and the Role of the Marketplace,
Washington DC: American Council on Education, Available:
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Overview-of-Higher-Education-in-the-United-States-Diversity-Access-and-the-Role-of-theMarketplace-2004.pdf [11 Mar 2015] pp.1-2∘ International Affairs Office (2008) Organization of U.S. Education: Tertiary Institutions, U.S. Department of Education, Available:
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/postsec-inst.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ U.S. Department of Education (2015) Types of Schools, Available:
https://studentaid.ed.gov/prepare-for-college/choosing-schools/types#career-schools [24 Feb 2015]

Number of institutions
PublicPrivatePrivateTotal

Privatenot-for-profit

for-profit

Four-year

706

1,645

827

3,178

77.8

Two-year

1,038

172

1,071

2,281

54.5

267

86

1,707

2,060

87.0

2,011

1,903

3,605

7,519

73.3

Less-than two-year
Total

(%)

2013/14, institutions located in U.S. only
Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) IPEDS Data Center, Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ [11 Mar 2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

9

Number of enrollments
PublicPrivatePrivatenot-for-profit

for-profit

Private

Total

(%)

Four-year

8,078,482

3,936,065

1,310,203

13,324,750

Two-year

6,608,918

41,119370,801

7,020,838

5.9

56,727

11,901

255,486

324,11482.5

14,744,127

3,989,085

1,936,490

20,669,702

28.7

Less-than two-year
Total

39.4

Fall 2013, full-time and part-time, estimated, institutions located in U.S. only
Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) IPEDS Data Center, Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ [11 Mar 2015]

Percentage of full-time enrollments from all enrollments
PublicPrivatePrivatenot-for-profit

for-profit

Total

Four-year

73.4

75.4

62.5

72.9

Two-year

39.2

78.4

89.5

42.1

Less-than two-year

51.6

89.8

82.7

77.6

Total

58.0

75.5

70.3

62.5

Fall 2013, institutions located in U.S. only
Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) IPEDS Data Center, Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ [11 Mar 2015]

Number of employees (full-time and part-time)
PublicPrivatePrivatenot-for-profit

for-profit

Total

Four-year

1,588,783

1,081,221

166,464

2,836,468

Two-year

647,059

7,846

57,827712,732

Less-than two-year

12,8191,922

37,94052,681

2,248,661

1,090,989

262,2313,601,881

Total

Fall 2013, institutions located in U.S. only
Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) IPEDS Data Center, Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ [11 Mar 2015]

4. Student admission
The U.S. higher education includes institutions with a wide range of admission selectivity, from open-accessinstitutions that admit all students, to highly selective research universities and liberal arts colleges that admit
only a small fraction of applicants. Admissions decisions at selective institutions are based on a set of academic
criteria, including high school coursework, grade point average and class rank, and admissions test score, as
well as a more flexible set of non-academic characteristics, such as demonstrated leadership ability, creativity,and community service. The admissions decisions at highly selective institutions are so complex and consider
so many factors. Because the U.S. has no national secondary school curriculum or high school exit examination,some institutions consider either of two privately developed admissions examinations
Assessment Test) and ACT (American College Test).

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

the SAT (Scholastic

10

Source:∘ Eckel, P.D. & King, J.E. (2004) An Overview of Higher Education in the United States: Diversity, Access, and the Role of the Marketplace,
Washington DC: American Council on Education, Available:
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Overview-of-Higher-Education-in-the-United-States-Diversity-Access-and-the-Role-of-theMarketplace-2004.pdf [11 Mar 2015] p. 8

5. Higher education credentials
Non-degree credentials
Certificate
Certificates are awarded upon the successful completion of a brief course of study, usually one year or less but
at times longer, primarily in public or private two-year institutions of higher education, university extension
programs or non-degree granting postsecondary institutions like area career and technical education schools.
Some certificates are issued beyond pre-baccalaureate level, at post-baccalaureate and post-master levels.

National Center for Education Statistics defines certificates into three categories (NCES, 2012). Short-term
credentials are issued after completion of programs less than 1 academic year; less than 900 clock hours, lessthan 30 semester credit hours, or less than 45 quarter credit hours. Programs that last at least 1 but less than 2
academic years, i.e. at least 900 but less than 1,800 clock hours, at least 30 but less than 60 semester credit
hours, or at least 45 but less than 90 quarter hours, issue moderate-term credentials. The other category,long-term credentials, are issued after programs at least 2 but less than 4 academic years; 1,800 or more clock
hours, 60 or more semester credit hours, or 90 or more quarter hours.

Certification
Certifications are different from certificates. They indicate mastery of or competency in specific knowledge,
skills or processes that can be measured against a set of accepted standards. These are not tied to a specificeducational program, but are typically awarded through assessment and validation of skills in cooperation witha business, trade association or other industry group. After attaining a certification, individuals often must meetongoing requirements to maintain the currency of the certification.

LicenseA license is legal permission, typically granted by a government agency, to allow an individual to perform
certain regulated tasks or occupations. A license can be obtained by meeting certain requirements set forth by
the licenser, usually by completing a course of education and/or assessments. Upon receipt of a license,
ongoing requirements may be necessary to maintain the license.

Intermediate Graduate Qualifications
The U.S. higher education system awards several qualifications that represent studies and research beyond thedegree but that are not the equivalent of a research doctorate. Most of these qualifications are in
professional fields of study and represent a level of education corresponding to advanced professional
standing.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

11

Degrees
Associate Degree
The associate degree can be awarded in academic or professional subjects and also in terminal career andtechnical programs. Two-year colleges (community colleges) and a small number of four-year institutions
grant associate degrees. Associate degrees may represent a terminal degree in a vocational field or may prepare-year institution. Credits earned in associate degree programs
its from

agreements between institutions.

fullis a recognized higher education degree.

Most associate degrees earned in academic programs are Associate of Arts (AA) or Science (AS) degrees.
Another common associate degree is the Associate of Applied Science (AAS), which has a stronger
career/vocational emphasis than AA/AS degrees but is generally transferrable to a bachelor s program. The
Associate of Occupational Science (AOS) degrees are less common and have the strongest career/vocational
emphasis. AOS is typically designed not to be transferrable to a bachelor s program.

ree-time study to complete.

However,some degrees take longer to complete, including those in engineering, architecture and other fields. The

full-time equivalent college-level work

ncludes bachelor's degrees in which the normal 4 years of work

are completed in 3 years.

U.S. bachelor degree programs usually include requirements for breadth as well as depth of study, and students
will fulfill what are called liberal or general studies requirements for introductory knowledge in several subjects
as well as a concentration in one or more subjects, called a major.

entry-level jobs as well as for possible advanced study. Whether students continue their studies or enter thelabor market, they will need to understand the basic principles of fields other than their own narrowspecialization, and they will need skills

such as languages, IT and computational skills

that cannot be

obtained exclusively in their major field. This extra knowledge and skill must be obtained at the higher
education level. And the degree program should be structured so that the additional knowledge and skill
complements the main subject concentration.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

12

by some institutions and involve more independent study or a different
curriculum, require a thesis or special project, and may have special admissions requirements.

A number of U.S. higher education institutions offer programs that permit a student to earn a specialized

thereafter. Postare often completed as part of the degree program.

-level qualification, or second cycle degree, in the U.S. higher

longer depending on how the degree program is structured, whether the student is enrolled full-time orpart-time, the degree requirements and the prior preparation of the student.

) and Master of Science (MS or

required graduate-level courses and seminars, passing comprehensive examinations in the major subfield offaculty supervision.

sional fields may be structured as research degrees (as in engineering, forexample), or they may be structured specifically to prepare students to work in an applied professional field at
an advanced level (as with the MBA).

Doctoral Degrees
The research doctorate, or the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) and its equivalent titles, represents the highest
academic qualification in the U.S. education system. U.S. doctorates are structured programs of advanced study
and supervised research. Students admitted to doctoral programs must complete all qualifying graduate-levelcoursework and participate in doctoral seminars and colloquia. Students who complete these preliminary
requirements at a satisfactory level (usually an A average grade is required) must then pass written
comprehensive examinations that cover their chosen research specialization plus two or more adjunctspecialties, one of which is often in a related subject area. Successful students who pass the examinations andreceive the recommendation of the doctoral faculty are advanced to candidacy for the doctorate.

The doctoral candidate selects a doctoral dissertation advisor and doctoral committee. The advisor and

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

13

committee approve the dissertation research proposal and are available to advise on the progress of the
independent research program. When the candidate and the advisor judge that the research is completed andthe dissertation is finished, the candidate is scheduled for a public oral examination defending the dissertation.
At the conclusion of the oral defense, the dissertation committee votes on whether to award the doctorate andsign the dissertation, which is then published in print and/or electronically and made available for theacademic community.

First-Professional degrees
First-professional degrees represent a category of qualifications in professional subject areas that require
students to have previously completed specified undergraduate coursework and/or degrees before enrolling.
They are considered graduate-level programs in the U.S. system.

A first-professional degree is an award that requires completion of a program that meets all of the following
criteria: (1) completion of the academic requirements to begin practice in the profession; (2) at least 2 years ofcollege work prior to entering the program; and (3) a total of at least 6 academic years of college work tocomplete the degree program, including prior required college work plus the length of the professional
program itself. First-professional degrees may be awarded in 10 fields including Chiropractic, Medicine,
Jurisprudence, and Divinity.

Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP)
NB: Many countries have established national qualifications framework which describes what holders of a particular level ofqualifications should commonly have (learning outcomes) to classify qualifications into different levels. While there is nosuch framework in the United States, a project called DQP has started to define learning outcomes for degrees.

The Degree Qualifications Profile (DQP) outlines a set of reference points for what students should know andbe able to do upon completion of associate, bachelor s and master s degrees in any field of study. It isdeveloped by National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA)*, the Institute forEvidence-Based Change (IEBC)*, and the Lumina Foundation*. There are five broad categories of proficiencies
which provide a profile of what degrees mean in terms of specific learning outcomes. The DQP, on a voluntarybasis, invites adaptation within the context of varied institutional missions. More than 400 colleges anduniversities that have experimented with the DQP have already taken action on many of these applications.
Case studies of those institutions are shared on the DQP s website (Lumina Foundation, 2015).

Five categories of learning Specialized knowledge: proficiencies involving terminology, theory, methods, tools, literature, complex
problems or applications and cognizance of limits;
 Broad and integrative knowledge: exploring, connecting and applying concepts and methods acrossmultiple fields of study;
 Intellectual skills: proficiencies transcending the boundaries of particular fields of study;
 Applied and collaborative learning: what graduates can do with what they know;

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

14

 Civic and global learning: preparing graduates for knowledgeable and responsible participation.

NILOA: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment
Established in 2008, the National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA) assists institutions and others in discovering andanddisseminate ways that academic programs and institutions can productively use assessment data internally to inform and strengthen
undergraduate education, and externally to communicate with policy makers, families and other stakeholders.
IEBC: Institute for Evidence-based Change
The nonprofit Institute for Evidence-Based Change (IEBC) is focused on improving educational practice by helping education stakeholders
use data and information to make informed decisions and increase student success.
Lumina Foundation
Foundation strives to help people achieve their potential by expanding access to and success in education beyond high school and iscommitted to increasing the proportion of Americans with high-quality degrees, certificates and other credentials to 60 percent by 2025.

Sources:∘ Eckel, P.D. & King, J.E. (2004) An Overview of Higher Education in the United States: Diversity, Access, and the Role of the Marketplace,
Washington DC: American Council on Education, Available:
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Overview-of-Higher-Education-in-the-United-States-Diversity-Access-and-the-Role-of-theMarketplace-2004.pdf [11 Mar 2015] p. 9
∘ International Affairs Office (2008a) Structure of the U.S. Education System: Associate Degrees, U.S. Department of Education, Available:
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/associate.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008b) Structure of the U.S. Education System: Bach
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/bachelor.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008c) Structure of the U.S. Education System: First-Professional Degrees, U.S. Department of Education,
Available: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/professional.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008d) Structure of the U.S. Education System: Intermediate Graduate Qualifications, U.S. Department of
Education, Available: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/grad.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008e
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/master.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008f) Structure of the U.S. Education System: Research Doctorate Degrees, U.S. Department of Education,
Available: www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/doctorate.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ Lumina Foundation (2015) Degree Qualifications Profile http://degreeprofile.org/ last accessed on 18 Mar 2015
∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2012) Defining and Reporting Subbaccalaureate Certificates in IPEDS, Available:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012835/index.asp [30 Mar 2015]∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Glossary, Available fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/ [30 Mar 2015]

6. Federal and local governments
The U.S. federal government does not have much direct authority over U.S. education. The Constitution does
not mention education as a general responsibility and the federal government plays a limited role. In fact, theU.S. had never had an education ministry until the U.S. Department of Education was established in 1980.

Public and private higher education institutions enjoy more autonomy and are more internally self-governing
than are schools. Nevertheless, state governments exercise oversight and coordinating authority over higher
education within their jurisdictions, issue corporate charters to institutions, regulate standards and quality tovarying degrees, and may have regulatory authority over various aspects of the operation of public institutions.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

15

The role of the U.S. federal government is limited to the following: Exercising leadership in promoting educational policies and reform efforts of national scope; Administering federal assistance programs authorized and appropriated by Congress;
 Enforcing federal civil rights laws as they pertain to education;
 Providing information and statistics about education at the national and international levels; and Providing technical expertise to the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, otherfederal agencies and Executive Office of the President in conducting the foreign affairs of the United States
as these pertain to education and within the limited scope of federal power in this area.

The federal government does not:
 Own, control or oversee U.S. schools or postsecondary institutions*; Accredit, or license schools, postsecondary institutions, or other educational providers; Set curricula or content standards for academic or professional subjects;
 Hire or license faculty or other educational professionals;
 Set educational standards for the admission, enrollment, progress, or graduation of students at any level; Set standards, license, or regulate professional occupations or practicing professionals (other than federal
civilian and military personnel); or Determine or allocate educational budgets for states, localities, or institutions.
*Except for institutions established to serve federal personnel and their families, such as the military service academies
and advanced service schools, plus public schools located overseas to educate children of U.S. personnel stationed
abroad.
Source:∘ International Affairs Office (2008) Organization of U.S. Education: State Role II - Tertiary Education, U.S. Department of Education,
Available: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/postsec.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008) Organization of U.S. Education: The Federal Role, U.S. Department of Education, Available:
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/fedrole.doc [30 Mar 2015]

7. Related organizations
Governmental organizations
 U.S. Department of Education [http://www.ed.gov/] White House [https://www.whitehouse.gov/]
Accreditation council
 Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) [http://www.chea.org/]
Educational institutions associations
 American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) [http://www.aascu.org/] American Council on Education (ACE) [ http://www.acenet.edu/Pages/default.aspx]
 Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE) [https://www.acteonline.org/]
 Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) [http://www.aacu.org/]
 Association of American Universities (AAU) [http://www.aau.edu/]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

16

 Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU) [http://www.aplu.org/]
 Council of Independent Colleges: CIC) [http://www.cic.edu/] National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) [http://www.naicu.edu/]
Higher education-related foundations
 Bill and Mellinda Gates Foundation [http://www.gatesfoundation.org/]
 Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching [http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/]
 Lumina Foundation [http://www.luminafoundation.org/] Teagle Foundation [http://www.teaglefoundation.org/]Media
 Inside Higher Ed [https://www.insidehighered.com/] The Chronicle of Higher Education [http://chronicle.com/]*Above websites were accessed on 20th Apr 2015.

8. Management and student engagement in higher education institutions
Administration
Although the internal organization and structure of U.S. institutions vary based upon size and mission, somecommon elements exist.

Board of trustees: Boards of trustees who tend not to be academics govern most college and universities. Theseboards are the legal agents for the institution and are responsible for ensuring and monitoring its financial
health, setting strategy to fulfill its mission, and evaluating both institutional and presidential performance.
The size, structure, and appointment of boards vary.

President: Boards hire and delegate much of the administrative responsibility for managing the institution to
the president (sometimes called a chancellor). A president is responsible for providing overall leadership to theestablishing systems of accountability and performance. However, much of ainstitution. A
external audiences, meets with alumni and prospective students, develops relationships with corporations andcommunity groups, and provides the public persona of the institution.

Faculty senate: Although presidents have primary responsibility for the institution, most rely upon a system ofshared governance between faculty and administrators for key institutional decisions. The primaryorganizational structure for shared governance is the faculty senate. The senate is responsible forrecommending academic decisions and policies, such as those affecting new curricula and courses, degree
requirements, and academic hiring and workloads. Its members typically include full-time faculty, althoughstudents, administrators, staff, and part-time faculty sometimes participate as well.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

17

Student organizations
Higher education institutions host various student organizations and clubs, including academically focusedgroups, as well as athletic, cultural and religious, and social organizations. Another important student
organization is student government, which is a formal, recognized student advocacy body on campus.

Source:∘ Eckel, P.D. & King, J.E. (2004) An Overview of Higher Education in the United States: Diversity, Access, and the Role of the Marketplace,
Washington DC: American Council on Education, Available:
http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Overview-of-Higher-Education-in-the-United-States-Diversity-Access-and-the-Role-of-theMarketplace-2004.pdf [11 Mar 2015] pp.11-12

9. Tuition
Average published tuition for full-time, first-time undergraduate students
In-district
PublicIn-state

Out-of-state

Total

4,169

4,460

10,426Four-year

6,255

6,265

15,792

Two-year

2,671

3,164

6,786

Less-than two-year

6,530

6,530

7,038

PrivateTotal

23,00923,01623,028(not-for-profit)

Four-year

23,98323,98523,989Two-year

12,38912,45912,581Less-than two-year

10,50810,50810,508

PrivateTotal

14,54914,54914,549(for-profit)

Four-year

15,001

15,001

15,001

Two-year

13,923

13,923

13,923Less-than two-year

13,755

13,755

13,755

13,435

13,54915,841Total

In USD, 2013/14, institutions in U.S. only
Source:∘ National Center for Education Statistics (2015) IPEDS Data Center, Available: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/ [11 Mar 2015]10. Student aid
A wide array of government and private financial aid programs provides assistance to students, based on bothfinancial need and academic or other merit. Financial aid to students includes federal grants, loans, and tax
credits, state grants, and grants provided by colleges and universities, as well as private organizations.

Federal student aid is financial help for students enrolled in eligible programs at participating schools to cover

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

18

school (a four-year or two-year public or private educational institution, a career school or trade school)
expenses, including tuition and fees, room and board, books and supplies, and transportation. The three mostcommon types of aid are grants, loans, and work-study.

federal grants are for undergraduate
students and the grant amount is based on need, Cost of Attendance, and enrollment status. Federal Pell Grants
for 2015/16 will be provided up to $5,775. Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants will range
from $100 to $4,000. Many states also offer need-based grants, and many colleges and private organizations
offer grants and scholarships.

Loans are borrowed money that must be repaid with interest. Both undergraduate and graduate students may
borrow money. Maximum loan amounts depend on the student's year in school. Parents may also borrow to
pay education expenses for dependent undergraduate students. For example, the William D. Ford Federal
Direct Loan Program, under which the U.S. Department of Education becomes lender, includes Direct
Subsidized Loans for undergraduate students with financial need and Direct PLUS Loans for professional
students and parents of dependent undergraduate students. Whereas, the Federal Perkins Loan Program, underwhich the school is lender, is a school-based loan program for undergraduates and graduate students withexceptional financial need.

Federal Work-study lets students earn money while enrolled in school to help pay for education expenses.
The United States government does not provide student assistance to non-citizens except in the limited case offederal exchange programs and some research opportunities for scientists and mid-career professionals.
Students who come to the United States to study for diplomas or degrees are expected to be able to pay for
their study visits using their own resources plus assistance from their countries or private sources.

Source:∘ The office of Federal Student Aid (2015) Federal Student Aid, Available: https://studentaid.ed.gov/ [30 Mar 2015]11. Higher education laws
The U.S. education system is not based on a single, or even a few, framework laws. Instead, there are a wide
variety of federal, state and local laws, plus court decisions and regulations that define various aspects of its
decentralized system. In addition, there are rules and policies adopted by educational associations andindividual schools and institutions that often have legal status with respect to matters within their competence(Also refer to II-1. Historical overview of U.S. higher education).

The Higher Education Act of 1965 does not resemble the School Education Law in Japan, in which theeducational structure in the country is defined. The Higher Education Act in the U.S. was signed into law in1965 for the government s commitment to make college experience within financial and geographic reach of
everyone. Since then, it has been reauthorized nine times with additions and modifications of aid programs.
The latest reauthorization occurred in 2008 under the title of Higher Education Opportunity Act.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

19

Source:∘ Bawn, S., Kurose, C., and McPherson, M. (2013) An Overview of American Higher Education, Available:
http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/docs/23_01_02.pdf [24 Mar 2015], p. 19∘ International Affairs Office (2008) General Information Resources About Education in the United States, U.S. Department of Education,
Available: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/generalinfo.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ The Chronicle of Higher Education (2013) What You Need to Know About Reauthorization, 19 Sep 2013, Available:
http://chronicle.com/article/What-You-Need-to-Know-About/141697/ [22 Apr 2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

20

III. The quality assurance system
1. Historical overview
Regional accreditation
Accreditation s origins are found in the activities and concerns of several regionally based associations ofcolleges and universities, starting from the foundation of New England Association of Schools and Colleges in
1885. By 1895, another three regional associations were established covering the Middle Atlantic states, theNorth Central states and the Southern states respectively. The North-West Association and the Western
Association were established later, in 1917 and 1962 respectively.

Initially, the purposes of these associations were to establish closer relations between college administratorsand those of secondary schools and, also, to establish standards regarding what constituted adequate
preparation for college study. In addition, closer relations were also desired between member colleges tofacilitate transfers. They eventually defined standards for membership in their associations and then extend
admissions offers only to students applying from member institutions.

In 1905, the North Central Association took an action by certifying, or accrediting, secondary schools. This wasfollowed by accreditation of colleges by 1909 and the first list of accredited institutions was issued in 1913.
Thus, accreditation became a firm basis on which to evaluate the worthiness of applicants from institutions thatthey had no direct knowledge of, including applicants from high schools and students who wished to transferfrom one college to another. However, such an effort did not extend all across the country; the Western College
Association began its accrediting activities only in 1948 and the New England Association in 1952.

From 1920s by the North Central Association, a change in approach occurred in accreditation that, instead ofusing a few numerical facts, each institution was judged qualitatively on its total activities and in accordancewith its own stated purposes. Since then, especially from the post-Second World War era which saw rapid
expansion in the number and type of higher education institutions, regional accrediting agencies have revised
and modified both their standards and evaluation procedures a number of times.

Program accreditation
The initial development of program accreditation also occurred in the early twentieth century. However, thereason for action was different: with program accreditation, the precipitating issue was a concern with how well
the colleges and universities were preparing their graduates.

It was the medical profession that was first to act when representatives of medical colleges took several steps tocreate a register of schools that met certain agreed-upon standards of quality between 1876 and 1903. However,the American Medical Association (AMA) - a membership association of individual practitioners - actuallydeveloped its own ten-category rating system for medical schools in 1905. Two years later, AMA issued a list of
acceptable schools based on its own inspection visits. These and subsequent actions by AMA are the basis for

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

21

what would become program accreditation in medicine as well as in other professional fields; individual
practitioner groups take the lead in setting standards.

Similarly, though the law schools association had developed a system of school visits and standards for legal
education from 1900, the American Bar Association - the practitioner organization - began its own inspection
activities from 1921 and onward. By 1930, several other professional areas including dentistry, architecture,library science, music, nursing, teacher education, collegiate business education also had accreditation-like
activities. By 1952, 22 program accrediting agencies had been formally recognized by the federal government(see next paragraph). The number increased to 47 by 1982 and to 68 in 2014.

Relationship with government
The U.S. tradition has long been one in which the federal government maintained an at-a-distance relationshipwith higher education institutions, whereas individual states have the major responsibility for education.
Having said that, the federal government expanded its involvement with the sector, as a result of the long-term
expansion of U.S. higher education that took place from the end of the Second World War.

Today, the federal government is responsible for the financial support for grants and loans that support higher
education students. In 1952, the federal recognition process was initiated as a way of regulating theaccreditation enterprise and producing a list of federally recognized accrediting organization. The Higher
Education Act of 1965 required the federal government to somehow determine institutional eligibility toreceive these funds. The U.S. Department of Education, then, has directed that institutions are eligible forparticipation in federal aid programs if they meet two fundamental conditions: (1) they are authorized or
licensed by the state in which they were located; and (2) they are accredited by one of the nationallyrecognized accrediting bodies determined to be reliable authorities on the quality of education that higher
education institutions offer. In 1992, the modified Higher Education Act stated the list of standards accreditingorganizations should observe for the Department s recognition.

CHEA
The development of accreditation in U.S. was unplanned and produced many instances of duplication andunanticipated difficulty. As a result, efforts to coordinate accreditation on a national basis have been taken overa long period of time. The Council on Postsecondary Accreditation (COPA) formed. It established process forrecognizing accrediting organizations. COPA dissolved and the National Policy Board on Institutional
Accreditation (NPB) established in 1993 to examine need for national coordination of accreditation. The
NPB-established working group designed a new organization to coordinate accreditation and the Council forHigher Education Accreditation (CHEA) was formed in 1996 (see more details in 3-2).

Conclusion
Quality assurance in the U.S. higher education, thus, consists of voluntary accreditation based on a long
tradition of cooperation among academic institutions and agencies of the federal government and state
governments providing necessary oversight. The three players in quality assurance are often referred to as

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

22

triad : accreditors, the federal government and state governments.

Sources:∘ Altbach, P.G., Gumport, P.J. and Berdahl, R.O. (1998) American Higher Education in the Twenty-first Century, Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press, pp.39-43, 57, 64∘ Ewell, P.T. (2008) U.S. Accreditation and the Future of Quality Assurance : A Tenth Anniversary Report from the Council for Higher

Education Accreditation, Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation, pp.17-21, 28, 48∘ The Commission Appointed by Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings (2006) A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher
Education, Available: http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/final-report.pdf [30 Mar 2015] p. ix∘ El-Khawas (2001) Accreditation in the USA: origins, developments and future prospects , Available:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001292/129295e.pdf [30 Mar 2015] pp. 27-37, 121-4

2. Introduction
The system of higher education in the United States is the most diverse in the world and higher education
quality review is not an exception. Unlike most countries, the United Statesformal, official oversight is performed by thetriad(accreditors, the federal governments and states). Additionally, some institutions also engage in voluntary
review of their own programs by nonprofit nongovernmental organizations and for-profit services.

External quality assurance
External quality assurance refers to activities undertaken by organizations or agencies outside of a higher
education institution or a program to measure, validate or certify its quality. External bodies review in many
forms, from accreditation to federal data collection and from state accountability and licensure reviews tosurvey-based rankings of institutions.

The purposes of external review are also manifold and include: promoting institutional accountability, ensuring that institutions meet specific certification or licensing requirements,
 establishing the eligibility of institutions to offer degrees and certificates, enabling institutions or programs to receive public funding, enforcing minimum financial and administrative standards,
 providing consumers with information on which to base education-related decisions, improving quality within institutions and programs.

Internal quality assurance
Internal quality assurance has long been part of the culture of higher education. Tenure and promotion reviews,
peer reviews of research, student evaluations and program reviews are examples of this tradition. Governing
boards also play an influential quality assurance role.

Source:∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2007) CHEA Almanac of External Quality Review 2007 , Washington D.C.: CHEA, p. 3

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

23

Student learning outcomes and assessment
Student learning outcomes have been an increasingly popular concept for quality assurance in the UnitedStates. Education institutions have been trying various ways to objectively assess what student obtain fromtheir educational programs, in part because accreditation organizations require such efforts.

Most accreditors, via accreditation standards, require member institutions to establish assessment methods forlearning outcomes; e.g. setting learning outcomes at an institution, program and course levels, and utilizing
various methodologies to assess them both quantitatively and qualitatively.

Meanwhile, the recognition process by the USDE and CHEA for accreditation organizations also include
standards which mentions student learning outcomes. A recognized accreditor is required to ask institutions toconcern about learning outcomes through its standards.

There are various ways to assess learning outcomes. The list Kuh et al. (2014) provided includes:
 Incoming student placement exams (ACCUPLACER, COMPASS), National student surveys (NSSE, CCSSE, UCUES, CIRP),
 General knowledge and skills measures (CLA, CAAP, ETS PP), Locally developed knowledge and skills measures, Classroom-based performance assessments such as simulations, comprehensive exams, critiques, Externally situated performance assessments such as internships or other community-based projects,
 Portfolios,
 Capstone projects (including senior theses), courses, or experiences, Rubrics,
 Alumni surveys, focus groups, or interviews,
 Employer surveys, focus groups, or interviews.

The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) has developed the VALUE rubrics, which
provide a good source of dialogue on assessment of college student learning. Consisting of 16 learning
outcomes shown below, the VALUE rubrics describe frequently identified characteristics or criteria for eacharea.
List of rubrics: inquiry and analysis, critical thinking, creative thinking, written communication, oral
communication, reading, quantitative literacy, information literacy, teamwork, problem solving, civic
engagement - local and global, intercultural knowledge and competence, ethical reasoning, foundations andskills for lifelong learning, global learning, integrative learning.

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) has awarded the CHEA Award for Institutional
Progress in Student Learning Outcomes to highlight institutional efforts to gather information on student
learning outcomes, to use this information for institutional improvement and to provide information to the

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

24

public since 2005. Institutions and programs are judged on the basis of criteria including articulating expected
outcomes for an institution, program or major; providing evidence of success with regard to outcomes;
informing the public (constituents external to an institution) about expectations and success with regard tooutcomes; using outcomes for institutional improvement; and evidence that outcomes have benefited theinstitution, program or major.

Acronyms
ACCUPLACER is a suite of tests that quickly, accurately and efficient ly assesses reading, writing, math and computer skills.
AC T Com pass is a c omputer - adaptive c oll ege plac emen t t est th at lets educ at ors evalu ate inc omin g stu den ts

levels .

NSSE National Survey of Student Engagement CCSSE Community College Survey of Student Engagement UCUES University of California
undergraduate Experience Survey CIRP Cooperative Institutional Research Program CLA Collegiate Learning Assessment CAAP Collegiate
Assessment of Academic Proficiency

ETS PPETS Proficiency Profile

Sources:∘ Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (2014) Accreditation Standards, Available:
http://www.accjc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Accreditation_Standards_Adopted_June_2014.pdf [1 Apr 2015]∘ ACT, Inc. (2015) ACT Compass Overview, Available: http://www.act.org/products/higher-education-act-compass/ [22 Apr 2015]∘ Association of American Colleges & Universities (2015) VALUE Rubrics, Available: https://www.aacu.org/value-rubrics [1 Apr 2015]∘ Commission on Colleges (2011) The Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement, Decatur: Southern Association ofColleges and Schools. Available: http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/2012PrinciplesOfAcreditation.pdf [1 Apr 2015],∘ Commission on Institutions of Higher Education (2015) Standards (Effective July 1, 2011), Available:
https://cihe.neasc.org/standard-policies/standards-accreditation/standards-effective-july-1-2011 [1 Apr 2015]∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2014) Effective Institutional Practice in Student Learning Outcomes: CHEA Award Recipients,
Available: http://www.chea.org/chea%20award/CHEA_Awards_All.html [6 Apr 2015]∘ Kuh, G.D., Jankowski, N., Ikenberry, S.O. and Kinzle, J. (2014) Knowing What Students Know and Can Do: The Current State of Student

Learning Outcomes Assessment in U.S. Colleges and Universities, Champaign: National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment,
Available: http://www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/documents/2013%20Survey%20Report%20Final.pdf [1 Apr 2015], p. 40∘ Higher Learning Commission (2015) The Criteria for Accreditation and Core Components, Available:
https://www.ncahlc.org/Criteria-Eligibility-and-Candidacy/criteria-and-core-components.html [1 Apr 2015]∘ Middle States Commission on Higher Education (2014) Standards for Accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation, 13th ed., Philadelphia:
Middle States Commission on Higher Education, Available: http://www.msche.org/documents/RevisedStandardsFINAL.pdf [1 Apr 2015]∘ Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (2010) Standards for Accreditation, Available:
http://www.nwccu.org/Pubs%20Forms%20and%20Updates/Publications/Standards%20for%20Accreditation.pdf [1 Apr 2015]∘ Senior College and University Commission (2013) 2013 Handbook of Accreditation, Available:
www.wascsenior.org/content/2013-handbook-accreditation [1 Apr 2015]∘ The College Board (2015) ACCUPLACER, Available: https://accuplacer.collegeboard.org/ [22 Apr 2015]∘ Mori, R. (2012)(, In: Fukahori, S. (ed.),), Available: http://www.nier.go.jp/koutou/seika/rpt_01/pdf/09_chapter_5.pdf [1 Apr 2015], pp. 106-117

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

25

3. Type of quality assurance system
 Accreditation
 Recognition of accrediting organizations
 Federal oversight of higher education
 State quality review of higher education
 Approval by state government

3-1. Accreditation
Accreditation is a process of external quality review created and used in higher education to scrutinize higher
education institutions and programs for quality assurance and quality improvement.

Both federal and state governments consider accreditation to be a reliable authority on academic quality. The
federal government relies on accreditation to assure the quality of institutions and programs for which thegovernment provides federal funds and federal student aid. Most state governments initially license
institutions and programs without accreditation. However, states will subsequently require accreditation to
make state funds available to institutions and students and, in many cases, to maintain state licensure.

Values and beliefs of regional accreditation
U.S. regional accreditation is built upon a core set of traditional academic values and beliefs. These aredescribed by the following statements:
 Higher education institutions have primary responsibility for academic quality; colleges and universities
are the leaders and the key sources of authority in academic matters,
 Institutional mission is central to judgments of academic quality, Institutional autonomy is essential to sustaining and enhancing academic quality, The higher education enterprise and our society thrive on decentralization and diversity of institutional
purpose and mission.

Roles of accreditation
 Assuring quality: Accreditation is the primary means by which higher education institutions and programs
assure quality to students and the public. Accredited status is a signal to students and the public that an
institution or a program meets at least threshold standards for, for instance, its faculty, curriculum, student
services and libraries. Accredited status is conveyed only if institutions and programs provide evidence offiscal stability.
 Access to federal and state funds: Accreditation by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Department of
Education is required for access to federal funds such as student aid and other federal programs. Federal
student aid funds are available to students only if the institution or the program they are attending isaccredited by a recognized accrediting organization. State funds to institutions and students are contingent
on accredited status.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

26

 Engendering private sector confidence: Accreditation status of an institution or a program is important toemployers when evaluating credentials of job applicants and when deciding whether to provide tuition
support for current employees seeking additional education. Private individuals and foundations look forevidence of accreditation when making decisions about private giving.
 Easing transfer: Accreditation is important to students for smooth transfer of courses and programs among
higher education institutions. Receiving institutions take note of whether or not the credits a student
wishes to transfer have been earned at an accredited institution. Although accreditation is but one among
several factors taken into account by receiving institutions, it is viewed carefully and is considered an
important indicator of quality.

Type and number of accrediting bodies
As of October 2014, there are 86 accrediting organizations in the United States recognized either by the
Department of Education or the Council of Higher Education Accreditation, consisting of the following types:
1) Institutional accreditors
 Regional accrediting organizations
Targets: Non-profit colleges and universities (both public and private)
Number of organizations: 7 (located in six geographic regions) National faith-based accrediting organizations
Targets: Religiously affiliated and doctrinally based institutions on a national basis
Number of organizations: 4
 National career-related accrediting organizations
Targets: For-profit, career-based, single-purpose institutions, both degree and non-degree
Number of organizations: 72) Programmatic accreditors
 Programmatic or specialized accrediting organizations
Targets: Individual academic programs, professions and free-standing schools; e.g. law, medicine,engineering and health professions.
Number of organizations: 68

Accrediting organizations are accountable to the institutions and programs they accredit. They are accountable
to the public and governments that have invested heavily in higher education and expect quality. Accreditors
undertake an organizational self-assessment on a routine basis. Accreditors also undergo a periodic externalby the U.S. Department of Education and/or CHEA (Formore details, refer to III-3-2. Recognition of accrediting organizations).

Frequency
Review cycle vary, with some accreditors requiring comprehensive reviews every three years, some requiring
five-year reviews and still others every ten years. Some accreditors have a system for more focused mid-cycle
reviews.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

27

Standards and policies
While each accrediting organization establishes its own standards by which institutions and programs areaccredited, these standards all address similar areas, such as expected student achievement, curriculum, faculty,
services and academic support for students, and financial capacity. Standards are developed or changed
through a process of public consultation involving stakeholders such as faculty, administrators, students,
practitioners in specific fields, governing boards and members of the public. This process often involves aninvitation to the public.

Each accrediting organization lays out a framework of expectations and practices that govern the conduct ofaccreditation review. These policies may include areas such as conflict of interest and release of information.

Stages of accreditation
 Establishment of eligibility: Every accrediting organization has certain basic requirements that institutions
or programs must meet before they can apply for a review. Not all accrediting organizations have eligibility
requirements, but all accreditors do require that an institution be licensed or have authority to operatefrom the state in which it is located and have education as its primary purpose. Such institutional or
program eligibility requirements serve as a pre-screening for quality.
 Self-study: Once accepted for review, each institution or program must prepare a comprehensive

self-study involves the preparation of detailed written reports showing how the institution or program
determines whether it meets or exceeds the standards, as well as how it plans to improve its quality in the
future. Self-study reports may be prepared as confidential documents, although many institutions publish
them after the accreditation review cycle has been completed.
 On-site team visit: The selfteam during a visit to the campus. Team members have an opportunity to talk to faculty, students, staff andadministrators about issues and questions arising from the self-study. The team usually conducts an exit
interview with the president or dean to discuss issues that have surfaced during the review.
 Written team report: The visiting team prepares a comprehensive accreditation report that includes

draft report is usually shared with the campus or program leadership before it is made final. The final reportis then submitted to the accrediting organization, with recommendations about what action should betaken.
 Final decisions/appeals: Based on the team report, self-study and other evidence assembled by staff of theaccrediting organization, its commission or governing body takes an accreditation action. Accreditation
actions can take several forms, from granting accreditation to revoking accredited status. All accreditingorganizations permit appeals of their decisions to revoke accreditation.
 Monitoring: All accrediting organizations also monitor institutions and programs between visits.
Monitoring may be relatively unobtrusive in the form of a requirement to file annual statistical reports, or it
may be more extensive, including telephone contact, interim reports on topics of concern or additional
focused site visits. If the institution or program has changed its curriculum, offerings or instructional

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

28

methods or has opened a new site, the accreditor may require it to undertake a substantive change review
to examine the appropriateness of these new arrangements and their potential impact on the quality of thecore program.

Schedule
Each accreditor sets its own schedule. The amount of time for an accreditation review varies; e.g. from ninemonths to several years to complete a full review.

Publication of data
Generally speaking, the following information is made available by accrediting organizations: Self-study reports and team visit reports offering description and analysis of institutions and programs thatare reviewed (certain circumstances or permission required), Dates of upcoming accreditation visits, Members of an organization's accrediting decision-making body, Staff members of accrediting organizations, Finances of accrediting organizations.

Institutions and programs accredited by recognized accrediting organizations (As of 2013)
Accreditor type

Number of

Number of

Institutions

programs

Regional accrediting organizations

3,049

-

National faith-based accrediting organizations

503-

National career-related accrediting organizations

4,344

-

Programmatic or specialized accrediting organizations-

42,686

Source:∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2015) CHEA Almanac Online, Available: http://www.chea.org/Almanac%20Online/index.asp[30 Oct 2015]

The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) database lists nearly 7,900 degree-granting andnon-degree-granting institutions and over 40,000 programs that are accredited by U.S. accreditingorganizations that have been recognized either by CHEA or by the United States Department of Education

description of the accredited status of the institutions or programs on the list and the year for which the list is
accurate.

Funds
Accrediting organizations are funded primarily by annual dues from institutions and programs that are
accredited and fees that institutions and programs pay for accreditation reviews. In some instances, anaccrediting organization may receive financial assistance from sponsoring organizations. Accrediting

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

29

organizations sometimes obtain funds for special initiatives from government or from private foundations.

Source:∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2006) Accrediting Organizations in the United States: How Do They Operate to Assure Quality?,
Fact Sheet #5, Available: http://www.chea.org/pdf/fact_sheet_5_operation.pdf [30 Mar 2015]∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2007) CHEA Almanac of External Quality Review 2007 , Washington D.C.: CHEA, pp. 8-9∘ Council for Higher Education (2015) CHEA Almanac Online, Available: http://www.chea.org/Almanac%20Online/index.asp [30 Mar 2015]∘ Eaton, J.S. (2012) An Overview of U.S. Accreditation, Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation, Available:
http://www.chea.org/pdf/Overview%20of%20US%20Accreditation%202012.pdf [30 Mar 2015] pp. 1-3, 6-7∘ Ewell, P.T. (2008) U.S. Accreditation and the Future of Quality Assurance: A Tenth Anniversary Report from the Council for Higher

Education Accreditation, Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation, pp. 12-16

3-2. Recognition of accrediting organizations
In the United States, accreditors are accountable to the institutions and programs they accredit. They areaccountable to the public and government that have invested heavily in higher education and expect quality.
Accreditors undertake an organizational self-assessment on a routine basis and are required to have internal
complaint procedures. Accreditors undergo a periodic external review of their organizations known as
her by CHEA or USDE.

(1) CHEA recognition of accreditation

purpose is to coordinate institutional and programmatic accreditation in the United States. To realize thispurpose, CHEA carries out three functions: representing the interests of private, voluntary self-regulation to thefederal government and the public; scrutiny (recognition) of the quality of accrediting organizations based onstandards established by CHEA for this purpose; and a range of membership activities that include conferences
and meetings, research, policy analysis and publications.

CHEA - Recognition standards
An accrediting organization seeking CHEA recognition is required to provide evidence that the following
standards have been met.
1) Advance academic quality
2) Demonstrate accountability
3) Encourage, where appropriate, self-scrutiny and planning for change and needed improvement
4) Employ appropriate and fair practices in decision making
5) Demonstrate ongoing review of accreditation practice6) Possess sufficient resources

CHEA - Frequency and implementing structure
CHEA accreditors are normally reviewed on a 10-year cycle with two interim reports. The review is carriedout by the CHEA Committee on Recognition, a group of institutional representatives, accreditors and publicmembers who scrutinize accreditors for their eligibility for CHEA recognition and review accreditors based on

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

30-evaluation. The review may also include a site visit. The Committee on Recognition
makes recommendations to the CHEA governing board to affirm or deny recognition to an accreditor.

(2) Federal recognition of accreditation organizations
The federal recognition process was initiated in 1952. The government sought some screening for higher
education quality to be linked to the burgeoning federal student financial assistance program. Rather thancreate a quality assurance system of its own, the government chose to rely on accreditation. Federal
recognition is currently required for accrediting organizations that certify institutional eligibility forparticipation in federal student financial aid programs under Title IV of the 1965 Higher Education Act or
certain other federal funding. Higher education institutions and programs wishing to participate in federal
student aid or other federal programs must be accredited by a federally recognized accrediting organization.

USDE - Recognition standards
Currently, t

in

the following areas:1)
appropriate, consideration of course completion, state licensing examination and job placement rates,
2) Curricula,3) Faculty,4) Facilities, equipment and supplies,5) Fiscal and administrative capacity as appropriate to the specified scale of operations,
6) Student support services,
7) Recruiting and admission practices, academic calendars, catalogs, publications grading and advertising,8) Measures of program length and the objectives of the degrees or credentials offered,9) Record of student complaints received by, or available to, the agency,
10)
the most recent student loan default rate data provided by the Secretary, the results of financial orcompliance audits, program reviews and any other information that the Secretary may provide to theagency.

USDE - Frequency and implementing structure
The federal recognition review normally takes place every five years. USDE staff conduct the review based oncommunication with the accreditor, a written report from the accreditor and, from time to time, a visit to theaccreditor. USDE staff make recommendations to the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality
and Integrity (NACIQI), an appointed group of educators and public members, to recognize or not recognize
an accrediting organization. The committee, in turn, recommends action to the U.S. Secretary of Education.

(3) Recognized organizations
CHEA and USDE recognize many of the same accrediting organizations, but not all. USDE recognizes only
those accreditors;

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

31

because the Federal financial aid program is defined under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, these
Whereas, there are a number of specialized, programmatic
accreditors that are not Title IV gatekeepers; CHEA recognizes those. Also, some Title IV gatekeepers
voluntarily choose to earn CHEA recognition as well, resulting in some overlaps. In 2014, CHEA recognizes 60
accrediting organizations and USDE recognizes 51 accrediting organizations with a total of 85 accreditingorganizations that were recognized by either USDE or CHEA or both.

(4) Funds
CHEA funds its recognition activity through annual fees charged to its institutional members. The federal
government funds its recognition activity through a budget allocation from Congress to USDE.

Sources:∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2007) CHEA Almanac of External Quality Review 2007 , Washington D.C.: CHEA, pp. 11-12∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2008) Recognition of Accrediting Organizations: Policy and Procedures (revised), Available:
http://chea.org/pdf/Recognition_Policy-June_28_2010-FINAL.pdf [30 Mar 2015], pp. 4-8∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2014) Recognized Accrediting Organizations, Available:
http://www.chea.org/pdf/CHEA_USDE_AllAccred.pdf [15 Oct 2014]∘ Eaton, J.S. (2012) An Overview of U.S. Accreditation, Washington D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation, Available:
http://www.chea.org/pdf/Overview%20of%20US%20Accreditation%202012.pdf [30 Mar 2015] pp. 6-8∘ U.S. Department of Education (2015) Accreditation in the United States, Available:
http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation_pg13.html [17 Mar 2015]

3-3. State quality review of higher education
State-level quality review affects both public and private higher education institutions, but it is particularly
important for public institutions because they are dependent on state legislatures for a significant amount of
their funding. In the meantime, the quality of state review varies dramatically; some states do not require that
institutions be accredited in order to operate (e.g. California and Hawaii).

State Reviews
State quality review of higher education falls into two basic categories:
1) Reviews for state licensure, which affect private institutions
All private institutions must be licensed at the state level to offer degrees, credentials or certificates (Refer toII-6. Federal and local governments).

2) Reviews for state authority to operate and public accountability, including budget, policy and performance
reviews, which primarily affect public institutions
Public institutions require state authorization to operate. This is usually accomplished when the institution
is created by the state legislature.

State reviews, to the extent that they are required in addition to or in place of nongovernmental accreditation
reviews, may focus on the same aspects of quality that are examined by most accreditors. Institutions arereviewed for financial stability and administrative capacity, for overall institutional stability, for educational

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

32

quality, and to assure that they are providing the kinds of programs they claim to offer.

* The federal government only license or charter schools or institutions directly operated by it for the purpose of educating or
training government personnel or their children.

Accountability initiatives for public institutions
The role of state oversight in assuring improved higher education accountability has been the subject ofintense public policy debate. States have long been engaged in the direct assessment of public institutional
performance through program reviews, data collection and budgeting processes. More recent accountability
initiatives are also designed to yield readily understandable public information. All 50 states require some kindof assessment and evaluation of public higher education institutions, and most states have extended theirsystems to assure accountability as well, through public reporting on performance measures and a focus on theuse of resources.

Current dominant themes in state accountability systems include the need to pay attention to undergraduate
education and student learning outcomes and to the connection between institutional quality and student
learning. Most states require public institutions to formulate student learning and outcomes assessment
procedures and to set goals that will assure improvement in the quality of student learning. Increasingly, states
are also looking for quantitative measures of student achievement and institutional performance, in order todocument progress and improvement.

Sources:∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2007) CHEA Almanac of External Quality Review 2007 , Washington D.C.: CHEA, pp. 15-16∘ International Affairs Office (2008) Organization of U.S. Education: State Role II - Tertiary Education, U.S. Department of Education,
Available: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/postsec.doc [30 Mar 2015]∘ International Affairs Office (2008) Organization of U.S. Education: The Federal Role, U.S. Department of Education, Available:
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/fedrole.doc [30 Mar 2015]

4. Legitimate higher education institutions
An accredited status from a recognized accreditation organization and licensure from a state government are
an important factor to decide whether a higher education institution is legitimate or not.

However, CHEA and USDE do not recognize all the organizations which undertake appropriate accreditation
activity because recognition is a voluntary process for accreditors to go through. Thus, when you need to know
if a particular higher education institution is authorized to operate as a higher education institution by the statein which it operates, an investigation is individually required by using various sources such as those listed
below (NB: some institutions operate as business entities rather than higher education institutions).

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

33

Useful websites and databases
The Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs
http://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/(Database for institutions and programs accredited by USDE-recognized accreditors or state governments)
Database of Institutions and Programs Accredited by Recognized United States Accrediting Organizations
http://chea.org/search/default.asp(Database for institutions and programs accredited by CHEA- or USDE-recognized accreditors)
Lists of departments responsible of establishment of higher education institutions in each state
http://www.nasasps.org/listing-of-regular-members
http://www.chea.org/degreemills/frmStates.htm

Source:∘ Fujieda, E. (2015),, 16th Mar, KodairaIn their quest for higher education and training, students and the public in the United States sometimes
operations that offer certificates and degrees that are considered bogus. They may also encounter- dubious providers of accreditation and quality assurance or operations that offer acertification of quality of institutions that is considered bogus.

Diploma mills and accreditation mills mislead and harm. In the United States, degrees and certificates frommills may not be acknowledged by other institutions when students seek to transfer or to go to graduate school.
Employers may not acknowledge degrees and certificates from diploma mills when providing tuition assistancefor continuing
the quality of an institution. In the presence of diploma mills and accreditation mills, students may spend agood deal of money and receive neither an education nor useable credential.

In the Section 103 of Higher Education Opportunity Act, the term `diploma mill' means an entity that;(A)(i) offers, for a fee, degrees, diplomas, or certificates, that may be used to represent to the general publicthat the individual possessing such a degree, diploma, or certificate has completed a program ofpostsecondary education or training; and (ii) requires such individual to complete little or no education orcoursework to obtain such degree, diploma, or certificate; and(B) lacks accreditation by an accrediting agency or association that is recognized as an accrediting agency or
association of institutions of higher education (as such term is defined in section 102) by-(i) the Secretary pursuant to subpart 2 of part H of title IV; or (ii) a Federal agency, State government, orother organization or association that recognizes accrediting agencies or associations.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

34

The Better Business Bureau suggests one watch for the following features and regard them as red flags when
considering whether or not to enroll in a school: Degrees that can be earned in less time than at an accredited postsecondary institution, an example would
be earning a Bachelor's degree in a few months.
 A list of accrediting agencies that sounds a little too impressive. Often, these schools will list accreditation
by organizations that are not recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. These schools will also
imply official approval by mentioning state registration or licensing.
 Offers that place unrealistic emphasis on offering college credits for lifetime or real world experience.
 Tuition paid on a per-degree basis, or discounts for enrolling in multiple degree programs. Accredited
institutions charge by credit hours, course, or semester.
 Little or no interaction with professors.
 Names that are similar to well-known reputable universities.
 Addresses that are box numbers or suites. That campus may very well be a mail drop box or someone's
attic.

A fake accrediting agency, in the meantime, offers its accreditation for a fee without an in-depth review of thedescribe their accrediting standards and review processes.

Sources:∘ BBB of Chicago & Nor
http://www.bbb.org/chicago/news-events/news-releases/2014/better-business-bureau-warns-consumers-diploma-mills-can-damage-your-f
uture/ [27 Apr 2015]∘ Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2015) Important Questions about Accreditation, Degree Mills and Accreditation Mills,
Available: http://www.chea.org/degreemills/default.htm [18 Mar 2015]∘ U.S. Department of Education (2015) Diploma Mills and Accreditation, Available:
http://www2.ed.gov/students/prep/college/diplomamills/index.html [18 Mar 2015]∘ U.S. Government Printing Office (2015) Higher Education Opportunity Act, Available:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ315/html/PLAW-110publ315.htm [20 Apr 2015]

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation

35

Overview of the Quality Assurance System in Higher Education

United States of America
Second edition (2016)

Universal design fonts that are easy to read and understand are used in this document.

NIAD-UE
National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation