Dr. Ligaya D. Valmonte Assistant Faculty Consultant CPSC, Manila, Philippines
1. INTRODUCTION
Accreditation is a process whereby an external agency evaluates an institution, a program or a module based on a set of acceptable standards. It is a way of rewarding performing institutions and inspiring the others to do better. As a dynamic agency, it undergoes periodic review of its set standards and readjusts its criteria, policies and procedure to make it more responsive to the present times.
During the conduct of accreditation, the external body or the accrediting agency should pay attention to the following basic elements: organizational structure, unit of assessment, defining the model for accreditation, criteria for assessment, accreditation instrument and rating system.
This paper gives the description on the nature and fundamental elements of accreditation which hopefully would provide information in setting developmental directions in organizing regional bodies of accreditation and certification.
2. ACCREDITATION
The buzz word in today's educational institutions is accreditation (from the Latin word acreditus meaning trustworthy). Accreditation, being both a process and a result, focuses on the continuing improvement of educational quality. As a process, it is a form of review in which an accrediting body establishes sets of criteria and procedures to encourage high standards of quality education among its members. As a result, it is a form of certification or formal status granted by a recognized and authorized accrediting agency to an educational program, where applicable, to an educational institution as possessing certain standards of quality which are over and above those prescribed as minimum requirements for government recognition based upon an analysis of the merits of its educational operations, in terms of its philosophy and objectives. Accreditation should address fundamental concerns to put it in place. The following may be cited:
2.1 Organizational Structure
The organizational structure to carry out the accreditation program should be defined. Will it be an autonomous body, a new unit or a new unit attached to an existing structure? In the present case, creating a new unit of the existing CPSC organization may be worth considering, .
Functioning as a unit, the regional body is headed by a Chairman/President with the members of the Secretariat coming from the CPSC staff. National Coordinators for Accreditation shall also be designated to serve the regional body's eyes and ears in the member countries. Accreditors/auditors shall be drawn from a pool of experts who are qualified and have undergone training for this purpose.
With the involvement of all participating institutions, this body shall develop its own standards, procedures, and fiscal policies under the authority and subject to the approval of the Colombo Plan Staff College. All accreditation actions are certified and approved by the Director-General upon recommendation by the commission.
CPSC Organizational Structure (As Proposed)
2.2 Unit of Assessment
Different countries the world over adopt varying structures, functions, mechanisms and practices in their accreditation (or quality assurance) programs. But one of the most serious issues is the unit of assessment.
What is the unit of assessment used globally? Almost all countries have certain mechanisms in place that assess the institution (institutional) as a whole, the individual academic programs, discipline or module (specialized), or a few others using a mixture of both. Institutional accreditation evaluates an entire educational institution in terms of its mission and the agency's standards or criteria. It assesses the formal educational activities of the institution and also evaluates governance and administration, financial stability, admissions and student personnel services, institutional resources, student academic achievement, institutional effectiveness, and relationships with constituencies inside and outside the institution.
A specialized accrediting body evaluates particular units, schools, or programs within an institution. Specialized accreditation, also called program accreditation, is often associated with national professional associations such as those for engineering, medicine, and law, or with specific disciplines such as business, teacher education, psychology, or social work.
.A few examples may be recalled: In India where there are 245 universities and 11,000 colleges, program accreditation becomes unreasonable. In Iran's higher education system, the unit of accreditation is the institution. Mauritius which has only one university practices program accreditation while the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Hong Kong began with institutional review and later validate the individual programs. In 1994, Korea started a new type of accreditation where the unit of assessment is the institution covering six areas, namely: education, research, social service, faculty and instruction, facilities and equipment. In the Philippines, accreditation by discipline, a concept of accrediting a cluster of programs, like engineering and technology, sciences and others was recommended.
What unit of assessment should be adopted by the Colombo Plan Staff College? Shall we stick to accreditation by programs, or shall we explore other models? Corpus (2003) suggested three criteria in selecting the unit of assessment, namely: (1) number and size of institutions; (2) the purpose of accreditation; and (3) the feasibility of using the model.
Accreditation by programs has strong points. As it is reviewing a small unit, it enjoys the advantage of being well-focused; it looks into details. However, it is too fragmented, and in a country with many institutions, it would take many years, perhaps even a century to accredit all programs even in just one cycle.
On the other hand, accreditation by institution has practical advantages. First, academic quality is defined by its collective impact. In accreditation surveys, it is operationally strenuous to segregate the evaluation of certain inputs to the academic program as these are not used exclusively by the program under survey, but are shared with other units of the institution. Take the case of the library, the laboratories, the classrooms and other physical facilities. Even the services, such as student services, not tot mention the administrative programs, are extended institution-wide.
Another advantage of using the institution as the unit of assessment is its usefulness and relevance to the major stakeholders, such as the government, which provide the funds, the students, employers, aid-granting institutions, donors and foundations, etc. In those cases, the commitment and accountability are demanded from the recipient of the assistance, which is the institution and not from individual programs.
Other issues that need to be clarified is the nature of accreditation. Will it be voluntary as in the case of the Philippines, or mandatory as a matter of government policy? The Philippines, United States of America and United Kingdom have voluntary accreditation while Iran and Thailand have state-prescribed accreditation. In either ways, it is expected that accreditation serves the purpose of providing confidence to the end users that they are in fact competent. Independence is an important factor in increasing confidence as it helps to eliminate the presence or appearance of an impartial or biased assessment which would compromise confidence. Will accreditation be a government or private sector undertaking. Also, in the engagement of accreditors/auditors, will it be peer evaluation, or will it engage expert services? A mix of peer or expert services is a common practice world-wide.
2.3 Defining the Model of the Institution to be Awarded Accreditation Status
CPSC has set certain standards of quality which form the basis on which accreditation works. They specify the requirements for a system and articulate regional expectations for the quality of TEVT institutions. They are based on the best thinking of experts, on research, and on best practice. In a system designed to accredit TEVT institutions, the standards specify the input, process and output elements required to render the institution worthy of an award of accredited status, .
The input standards include the governance and administration (management and policy), human resources (administrators, faculty, support staff and students) and physical and financial resources (classrooms, laboratories, shops, libraries, computer resources, etc.). Some of the input standards rests on the policy making body i.e., for example, provision of medical insurance and other benefits, adequate facilities and equipment including a networking system, numbers of qualified staff and satisfactory facilities and equipment); some rests on the faculty and staff, i.e., faculty and staff development program. Other input standards are the human resources and physical facilities and funding.
Process standards represent actions steps executed by people, usually the faculty to ensure the delivery of quality services to the stakeholders. The curriculum and program of instruction provides experiences and opportunities for the acquisition of knowledge, skills and values is a process standard. CPSC identified four other process standards, namely: institutional and industry linkages, information and communication technology, continual improvement and research, and outreach and extension services.
Output standards are the performances which are dependent on the proper utilization of adequate inputs through a satisfactory process. The most important output is, of course, graduates equipped with skills and qualifications that are comparable with regional or even international standards.
A Model for Institutional Accreditation
2.4 Criteria for Assessment
The Criteria Statements and Core Components are presented here. Visit the Commission's Web site to view the Examples of Evidence.
The evaluation should be based on the objectives (mission) of the institution, all of the specific programs or disciplines. Evaluating the institution does not necessarily deny the coordination of the programs or cluster of programs. This is the starting point in accreditation. To achieve the objectives requires looking into the following:
1.
Curriculum/Course Content.
2.
Faculty/Training Staff
3.
Instructional Approaches/Procedures.
4.
The Resources to support instruction, such as: instructional materials particularly multimedia; library; physical facilities; laboratory; and shops and tools.
5.
Administration particularly on the wise use of resources
6.
Support given to students to help them succeed in their educational endeavors
7.
Research and community services, if these are appropriate for the institution or program, and desired through policies.
Benchmark statements or indicators of compliance which the above criteria have to be derived. Benchmark statements represent general expectations or desirable attitudes of the academic program which effectively contribute to the attainment of the outcomes standards. These attributes may be quantifiable, as in standard ratios, or are in the form of benchmark statements representing "good practice". The initial source of these benchmarks maybe the standards set by the government and "good practices" adopted by institutions, locally and abroad.
2.5 The Accreditation Survey Instrument
This instrument, or sometimes referred to as interview or survey guide is the tool that contain the criteria, the benchmark statements and the rating of individual indicators. If the accrediting agency opts to include research and extension, these criteria may be included as separate areas of assessment. CPSC intends to measure the quality of the institution by using 11-point criteria or standards of assessment. They are:
Vision, Mission, Goals and Objectives. The institution has a statement of vision, mission, goals and objectives that defines the institution, its educational purposes, its students & stakeholders, and its place in industry, business, technical education and vocational training and community as a whole.
Governance and Administration. The attainment of the vision, mission, goals and objectives rests on the institution's leadership, its system of governance and administration. In the case of institutions authorized and operated by the government, CPSC recognizes the responsibility of the government through the concerned ministry, for the legitimate authority of the institution.
Curriculum and Instruction. The institution's task of developing curriculum & instructional designs utilizes innovative teaching and learning systems, reflecting business and industry standards, which foster the active involvement of students & stakeholders in the learning process and provide them with sustained opportunities to learn essential knowledge, skills, and values for the work place. Moreover, the program of studies is consistent with global, regional, national and institutional goals and the specific objectives of the course offerings/programs.
Human Resources. The institution has competent, committed and effective human resources composed of its faculty, personnel or staff. The institution has a system of periodic evaluation of faculty and administration staff performance.
Physical and Financial Resources. The institution has adequate physical and financial resources to support its growth and development: Physical Resources (Facility and Equipment); Laboratories; Library and Information Resources; and Financial Resources (Budget Allocation).
Information and Communication Technology. The institution has consistently provided facilities (hardware, software, people ware) for the effective use of information and communication technology in technical education and vocational training to adequately prepare the knowledge workers in the information age. It explores and encourages innovative delivery system such as interactive learning, web-based teaching and learning systems, and internet services.
Institutional Effectiveness. The institution has a continuing strategic planning processes to achieve its vision, mission, objectives and goals. The institution shall systematically review and modify the institutional plans and planning process to determine their utility for assessing institutional effectiveness. This principle of institutional effectiveness covers the following: Organizational Performance; Systems Approach to Management; Performance Indicators; Quality Assurance and Enhancement; and Institutional Outcomes Assessment.
Industry-Institution Linkages. Linkages and networking are vital in the inter-play of the institutions programs management with community resources, including suppliers, agencies, organizations, business and industry for mutual benefit. The institution establishes linkages and network with other institutions, professional organizations, agencies and industry. It adheres to the highest ethical standards in its representation to its constituencies and the public and in its relationships with regulatory and accrediting agencies.
Outreach and Extension Services. The institution provides assistance through resource sharing to foster exchange, cooperation and understanding among communities in this borderless world through skills standardization, project implementation and technical support among member countries in the region.
Stakeholders' Satisfaction. The institution focuses on learners and stakeholders' services and satisfaction by providing systematic admission, quality instruction, student health and recreational facilities, socio-cultural interaction, scholarship grants, and counseling and placement services.
Continual Improvement and Research. The institution conducts relevant researches, utilizes continuous improvement strategies, reviews and validates feedback from stakeholders and undertakes corrective and preventive actions to improve quality continually. Teachers, staff and students should be involved in Quality Improvement Program (QIP) to enhance teaching and learning processes.
2.6 The Rating System
The judgment to be made on the quality of the institution/program under academic review may be expressed in a two-point scale (accredited or not accredited) or an elaborate continuum of scale characterized by levels (Level I, Level II, Level III and Level IV).
It has been the practice of most European countries to adopt only two classifications of institutions: accredited or not accredited. The disadvantage of this scheme is that it removes the incentive of the accredited institutions to aspire for a higher status, to be different from the rest. In India, taking notice of the European countries has modified the classification scheme. She still makes a distinction between the accredited or not accredited, but for the former, is a leveling from a one-star to five-star institutions.
There is an advantage of using a 4-level accreditation status to classify institutions. In the proposed model, CPSC proposes four-tiered C-A-R-E levels of accreditation. The minimum requirements for each level are the following:
Level I. Candidatus Level - refers to institutions/programs which have at least undergone a preliminary survey visit and are certified by the APACC as capable of acquiring accredited status within one or two years. No special benefits are provided for this level.
Level II. Acreditus Level - refers to institutions/programs which have at least been granted initial accredited status by the APACC, and whose status is certified by the latter.
Level III. Regalis Level - refers to institutions/programs which have been reaccredited and which have met the additional criteria or guideline set by the APACC for this level.
Level IV. Excelentis Level - refers to institutions/programs which have distinguished themselves in a broad range of disciplines and enjoy prestige comparable to international centers of excellence in TEVT to merit this rating in the future, provided they assume the task of assisting other institutions in a given discipline or geographical area.
The rating system is as follows:
Numerical
Adjective
5
Excellent
4
Very Good
3
Good
2
Fair
1
Poor
0
Missing
2.7 Accreditors/Auditors
The effective implementation of accreditation rests on the capability of the people who made the assessments, the accreditors/auditors. They may be drawn from the academe or from the industry. In some countries, accreditors/auditors may fail to pass the required training. They will be observed in the training sessions. They may be judged not to be suitable if, for example, they are unable to leave personal opinion aside and work toward the required standards. In such cases, these individuals are either not selected for teams, or their performance on the first visit or two is monitored.
They may be drawn from the academe or from the industry. They must be qualified, as their qualifications may include:
Technical competence in the areas of specialization, i.e., computer engineering
Technical competence to conduct accreditation
Educational Qualification fit to the institution or program to be accredited
Ability to make fair, unbiased judgment
Ability to communicate
In Good Health
No vices
3. CONCLUSIONS
The nature, conduct and standards of accreditation are diverse: program against institutional accreditation; voluntary government prescribed; discrete against scaled; quantitative against quantitative. Despite these differences, accreditation should address its fundamental concern - to promote a culture of quality and to encourage trust on behalf of stakeholders, parents, employers administrators and society.
REFERENCES
Benavot, A. Educational Globalization and the Allocation of Instructional Time in National Education Systems. Geneva: IBE, 2003.
Corpus, M. T. redesigning the Philippine Quality Assurance System. Journal of Philippine Higher Education Quality Assurance. Vol. 1, No. 1, Jan. 2003.
Cunning, D. Quality in Vocational Education - An International Perspective, Scottish Vocational Education Council (SCOTVEC), 1996.
Eaton, J. Regional Accreditation Reform: Who Is Served 2001 .
Harman, G. Developing and Managing Quality Assurance for Higher Education Systems and Institutions in Asia and the Pacific. Quality Assurance for Higher Education. Bangkok: UNESCO-PROAP, 1996.
Indhapanya, W. Standard for Quality Assurance: A Case of Thai Higher Education. International Conference on Quality Assurance in Higher Education in Bangkok, Thailand. 2000.
National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan 2000-2004. Manila: Technical Education and Skills Development Authority.
Samuels, J. Towards a Regional Qualifications Framework and the Work of the SADC/HRD Technical Committee on Accreditation and Certification. Conference on the Reform of Technical and Vocational Education and Training, Botswana: Gaborone, 2003.
Swiss Accreditation Service (SAS), Swiss Federal Office of Metrology and Accreditation, Lindenweg 50, CH-3003 Berne-Wabern
The Impact of Policy Systems in VTET in the Asia Pacific Region. Conference Proceedings. Brunei Darussalam: SEAMEO-VOCTECH, 2002.
TET Systems in Some Asia and Pacific Countries. Manila: Colombo Plan Staff College for Technician Education, 2002
Transforming TET institutions: The CPSC way. Manila: Colombo Plan Staff College, 2003.
Home 
