Author: Dave Williamson, International Education Evaluations, Senior Evaluator
Introduction
One of the most consequential things done in international credential evaluation – in addition to researching and recommending equivalencies and grade conversions, of course – is verifying the accreditation of institutions in other countries. Due to the somewhat confusing nature of higher education accreditation, however, this is also one of the more complicated and misunderstood parts of the evaluation process.
What exactly does this word mean, accreditation? Is this the same thing as recognition? Is registration sufficient to be considered accredited, in the US sense of the word? And finally, how does IEE determine which institutions are considered accredited?
Accreditation in the United States
Before we examine the intricacies of what accreditation is or means in other countries, it would be wise to first take a look at how this works in the United States, as a baseline. After all, the primary goal of the evaluation is to frame the qualification in question in a US context, so understanding the destination is vital to the journey. What does it mean for a university to be accredited in the US?
Simply put, accreditation in the United States is a determination of an institution’s legitimacy and the validity of the credentials that it awards. This typically comes in one of two ways. The first is called regional accreditation, and this is when one of the six regional accreditation bodies in the United States accepts and recognizes an institution as being of sufficient and comparable quality and rigor as the other institutions it currently accredits. It is a form of peer review, and ensures that the credits and programs awarded by one institution are recognized by the other member institutions. Currently, those regional accreditation bodies and their areas of responsibility are:
- New England Commission on Higher Education (New England)
- Middle States Commission on Higher Education (Mid-Atlantic)
- Southern Association of Colleges and School Commission on Colleges (Southeast)
- Higher Learning Commission (Midwest)
- Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (Pacific Northwest and Alaska)
- Western Association of Colleges and Schools Senior College and University Commission (California, Hawaii and the Pacific dependencies)
The second kind of accreditation generally encountered in the United States is called national accreditation, and this is when one of a number of national accreditation bodies accepts and extends their accreditation to an institution, regardless of its geographical location. These can be faith-based, career-related, or centered on the accreditation of a specific program of study (business, engineering, etc.).
While it may seem counter-intuitive, and the complete opposite of how the majority of other countries in the world accredit their institutions, regional accreditation is generally seen as the more prestigious, with more rigorous requirements, and is often a requirement for acceptance into graduate level study in the United States. National accreditation, for its part, while recognized as viable by the Department of Education, is usually more specialized in orientation, geared towards professional use, and therefore may not be as widely accepted.
University or Degree Recognition in Other Countries
Now that we have established a baseline for institutional accreditation in the United States, we can take a closer look at how this compares – and contrasts – with the education systems of other countries.
As mentioned, while regional accreditation in the US is a decentralized process, official accreditation in other countries is typically done on a national scale. This usually comes in the form of official recognition by the country’s ministry of higher education, such as the Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur, de la Recherche et de l’Espace (Ministry of Higher Education and Research and Space, also abbreviated as the MESRE) in France or the Ministério da Educação (Ministry of Education) in Brazil. In order for an institution to be considered as having the equivalent of regional accreditation in the US, it must be officially recognized by the relevant ministry in the country where it operates. This official recognition signals that those qualifications awarded by an institution are accepted by the state as valid and afford the holder certain rights. Many of these ministries maintain databases or publish lists where those officially recognized institutions can be viewed and verified, and others, like India’s University Grants Commission, even maintain lists of fakeuniversities, that is, those operating without official recognition and attempting to pass off their programs as recognized or legitimate.
Additionally, some countries include programmatic accreditation, where individual programs are assessed and recognized, such as Mexico. Here, public institutions are understood to be officially recognized based on their having been established by the state itself, and this recognition extends to those programs that they offer as well. For private institutions, however, each individual program must be reviewed and accredited by the relevant state authorities, such as the Secretaría de Educación Pública (SEP), and receive a Reconocimiento de Validez Oficial de Estudios for approved programs.
In some instances, there may be multiple avenues for official recognition in a single country, depending on the type of institution, and France is another example of this. In addition to official recognition by the MESRE, which focuses on public universities, the Répertoire National des Certifications Professionnelles (National Directory of Professional Certifications) is a national recognition scheme that focuses on professional, career-ready qualifications, usually offered by private institutions. These programs are less academically oriented and more focused on providing a standardized series of programs that prepare graduates for entry into the workforce, in specialized roles. A third option for official recognition in France comes in the form of membership in the Conférence des Grandes Écoles (Conference of Grandes Écoles, or “great schools”), which is a grouping of the country’s most prestigious institutions, both public and private. These schools are considered the most elite in the country, and therefore the CGE serves as the official accrediting body for its members.
There also exist forms of accreditation that combine both institutional recognition with programmatic accreditation, the most prominent examples being the Caribbean Accreditation Authority for Education in Medicine and Other Health Professions (CAAM-HP) or the Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine (ACCM). Regional organizations, CAAM-HP’s primary focus is on the accreditation of medical, dental and veterinary schools operating in the Caribbean, while the ACCM accredits medical institutions worldwide. For these sorts of specialized programs, official accreditation by CAAM-HP or ACCM is the benchmark equivalent of regional accreditation in the US.
Registration is Not the Same as Recognition
One of the most confusing aspects of recognition might arise when considering an institution that is legally registered to function within a country – and therefore, allowed to operate and conduct business – but lacks official recognition by the appropriate educational authorities. Private institutions may be duly registered as businesses in the countries where they operate, but this does not mean that their credentials are afforded recognition by the appropriate authorities, even though some private institutions may deem it sufficient. This can often lead to confusion, as many might assume that registration as legal functioning business entity is synonymous with some sort of accreditation, but this is not the case.
Third Party Accreditation and What it Means
Finally, it is important to take a look at what it means to be accredited by a third party, and how this might compare to official recognition by a state’s ministry of education.
Third party accreditation can come from a variety of places. In some instances, an organization might accredit an institution as a whole, such as the Accreditation Service for International Schools, Colleges & Universities, commonly referred to by the acronym ASIC. While based in the United Kingdom, ASIC has an international presence and accredits institutions in a number of countries.
In other cases, accreditation via a third party may be on a programmatic basis, such as through the Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs, which accredits university programs in business, or the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, now officially referred to as simply ABET, which focuses on engineering programs. These forms of programmatic accreditation are often seen as a sign of prestige, and signal to potential applicants the quality and rigor of the program.
But how do these forms of accreditation compare to the other forms of recognition we’ve been discussing? Can we consider accreditation by ASIC or ACBSP or ABET as comparable to regional accreditation in the US? In short, no, and this should not be taken as a slight. As we’ve established, when an institution is said to be regionally accredited in the US this is a determination of the institution’s validity, in much the same way as official recognition by a country’s ministry of education.
In contrast, accreditation by a specialized third-party is not intended to indicate an institution’s or program’s legitimacy. There are already well-established avenues for this, as we have discussed. Instead, accreditation by an organization like ASIC, ACBSP, or ABET points towards its weight or quality. While the vocabulary is largely the same, the aim of each is quite different.
Concluding Thoughts
Ultimately, issues regarding accreditation and recognition are some of the most relevant in the field of international credential evaluation, and the post has shown that the ways in which institutions and their programs are officially recognized or accredited are far from uniform. Regional accreditation in the US (a decentralized process apparent in its very title) is actually considered most functionally equivalent to more centralized, state recognition in the majority of other countries, usually by the ministry of education. Third-party accreditation, though meaningful in and of itself, serves a different purpose altogether: signaling quality, not legitimacy.
For evaluators, institutions and even students, understanding these distinctions is paramount. Misunderstanding accreditation can jeopardize an applicant’s graduate school or employment prospects, or conversely, legitimize credentials earned at questionable institutions. For this reason, careful research is of the utmost importance.
The frameworks discussed here serve as good starting points, but are by no means exhaustive. Each country’s education system is unique and requires careful attention. When in doubt, consulting primary sources is always the safest way to confirm the status of an institution, and hopefully, the path to determining those primary sources is now better defined.
