please respond to casnacita with 400 words a p a style
The five most important things learned.
1. I have acquired a multitude of knowledge from the course. To begin, I discovered that assessment should not be a one-time occurrence but rather a continuous process (Hanna et al., 2016). This aligns with accreditation standards, which require educational institutions to demonstrate a commitment to continual quality improvement (Hanna et al., 2016).
2. Another important thing I gained from this course was the significance of collecting feedback from a variety of stakeholder groups. This will usually include students, professors, alumni, administration, and often the community to acquire a comprehensive understanding of the institutions effectiveness. According to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 2023, this viewpoint is reflected in the accreditation standards that stress inclusive self-study methods and diverse viewpoints.
3. The course made it easier for me to understand how student learning outcomes are being used to assess the quality of education instead of relying solely on input metrics. According to the Southern Association for Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) (2024), this adjustment complies with accreditation agencies mandates that educational establishments provide a clear and comprehensible definition and assessment of student performance concerning predetermined learning objectives.
4. Realizing that assessment is a fundamental part of an institution’s operations rather than an additional one was an important lesson I learned. Continuous assessment guarantees that curricula are in line with changing expectations from our students and from the communities we serve.
5. Finally, this course taught me that the accreditation process may be complicated and resource-intensive, requiring careful planning and collaboration throughout an institution. This is consistent with the understanding that accreditation is a demanding, iterative process requiring constant attention and dedication (Higher Learning Commission, 2019).
Three major challenges
1. The rapid pace of legislative and regulatory change is a growing concern. Institutions must now navigate a complex web of new laws, regulations, and proposed sub-regulations, each with the potential to significantly impact their operations and academic work (Ewell, 2009). Ensuring compliance with these evolving requirements will be critical. This challenge is ranked first because it has profound implications for how institutions and faculty members carry out their work. According to the American Association of University Professors (2013), changes in the legal and regulatory landscape can shift priorities, restrict academic freedom, and impose new reporting and accountability obligations. Institutions will need to be proactive in monitoring these developments, interpreting their implications, and adapting their practices accordingly.
2. The growing diversity of students in higher education, including non-traditional and international students, is, in my opinion, an important concern. This calls for advanced and flexible methods of assessment. The standards set by accrediting bodies will have to be modified to consider such diversity and guarantee fair and inclusive assessments (Nelson & Hess, 2016). Because it directly affects the diversity of learners for whom institutions must demonstrate efficacy, this problem is placed second. To be inclusive and equal, I believe assessment and accreditation methods need to be modified.
3. While digital tools offer immense potential for streamlining and enhancing assessment processes, the transition from paper-based assessment to fully digital systems represent a significant hurdle (Wolff, 2009). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2020), institutions will need to carefully plan and execute this shift, ensuring that it improves efficiency without compromising the validity and reliability of assessments. This challenge is ranked second because it directly impacts the diversity of learners for which institutions must demonstrate effectiveness. It will also require a change in mindset and a commitment to rethinking traditional assessment and accreditation approaches.
References
Ewell, P. (2009). The evolving role of accreditation. Change, 41(2), 20-29.
Higher Learning Commission. (2019). Core components: The HLC approach to accreditation.
Hanna, K., Duvall, J., Turpin, R. L., Pendleton-Romig, K., & Parker, S. (2016). Mastering the Journey to Continuous Compliance: Process Improvements for Excelling at CCNE Accreditation. Sage Open, 6(2).
Middle States Commission on Higher Education . (2023, July 5). Standards for accreditation and Requirements of Affiliation: Fourteenth edition. Middle States Commission on Higher Education.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Fast Facts: Postsecondary Education.
Nelson, L. G., & Hess, D. (2016). The future of learning: Technology and the college student. Jossey-Bass.
The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). (2024, March 25). The Principles of Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement. SACSCOC.
Wolff, R. A. (2009). Future directions for U.S. higher education accreditation. Higher Education in Asia/Pacific, 7998.
