MBA Accreditation Guide

Are Accrediting Agencies Monitored?

---

Yes, they are. The Department of Education focuses on the performance and activities of each regional and national accrediting agency. For instance, the Obama administration, in April 2016, directed the Education Department to enforce accreditation standards more than they had been doing in recent history. The standards each agency was directed to enforce concerned the measurement of student achievement. In addition, the Obama administration directed each accreditation agency to think about additional areas of scrutiny that could be placed on problematic colleges and programs. The biggest focus was on the role of accreditation agencies as gatekeepers for federal financial aid.

Congress spoke up as well, reminding the Department of Education that agencies allowed low-performing colleges to retain accreditation. Additionally, Education was directed to conduct complete reviews of each accreditor to help bring up their educational standards.

Most of the concern has focused on for-profit colleges, such as Corinthian Colleges, which lost its accreditation, then was forced to close its doors all across the country.

The Department of Education was also instructed to increase the transparency that accreditors provide as they impose sanctions on schools. It was decided that providing more info to students rather than less was the better way to go.

Still, the Department of Education gives accreditors the latitude they need to impose sanctions on colleges or require troubled institutions to undergo renewal more frequently.

Accreditors have requested increased flexibility in overseeing educational institutions. Elite universities, such as Princeton, have requested less oversight, suggesting that agencies focus more on institutions with a poor track record.

Princeton University has also promoted accreditation that differentiates between US universities based on their past performance. The university suggested that a “self-study” and on-site visit covering selected topics in areas where the university is working on improvement should be the focus. The university also pointed out that, if the accreditation agency responsible for its performance focused more on institutions needing guidance and review, its resources will be better allocated.

Accreditors look at areas such as student retention, graduation, job placement, and student loan default as they determine which institutions maintain their accreditation. Schools and universities that are not performing to specified standards or helping students to succeed in their careers and life may be at risk of losing their accreditation.

Federal agencies are limited in the actions they can take on accreditors that aren’t doing everything they should be doing to meet the needs of their students. The most reliable action the feds can take: acknowledging the role of accreditation agencies as gatekeepers for federal financial aid. In pursuing this, the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity works to oversee accreditation agencies to ensure they will keep this recognition. The US Secretary of Education makes the final decision on which accreditation agency retains their role as federal financial aid gatekeeper.

In discharging this role, the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools failed to sufficiently oversee Corinthian College, along with other for-profit chain colleges, for their misuse of federal financial aid. The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges was challenged over sanctions it placed on several California community colleges, such as City College of San Francisco.

If the Department of Education finds that an accrediting agency is continuing to accredit any education institutions that are under dicipline by other accrediting agencies, that first accrediting agency may be ruled “ineffective.” If other metrics for accreditation are not used, such as student retention, the Department of Education retains the right to question the effectiveness of that agency.

In the end, several US senators would still want to see the Department of Education coming down more strongly on accreditors that appear to be failing or falling short in their responsibilities—as happened with ACICS and its oversight of Corinthian College. Some for-profit college chains may take a “predatory” stance when it comes to attracting students and ensuring they receive the educations they pay for.

Why Accreditation is So Important

---

You’re going to spend the next two years, immersed in some pretty weighty business classes, as you work toward your MBA. You want your efforts to bear fruit, helping you to find a job at a new level in your chosen business field.

If you decide to attend an unaccredited MBA program, you’re going to find that your job search is unnecessarily lengthened. Without that proof of accreditation from at least one accreditor, interviewers, companies and human resource departments are going to bypass your resume in favor of resumes from applicants who did take the time to enroll in accredited programs. This can’t be overstated.

Accreditation simply points out the quality of the MBA program that a school offers. All accreditation agencies carefully go through the programs of schools for which they are responsible. They look for evidence that the school, program and instructors all meet the high-quality standards that have been set. Specifically, they look at the students, teaching, faculty and services.

Search Programs Offering Masters Majors

The AACSB, AMBA and EQUIS accreditation agencies are all responsible for overseeing and accrediting MBA programs in the United States and in Europe. If a program is accredited by all three agencies, it has achieved the “triple crown” distinction—making it a very high-quality program, indeed. Students who successfully complete and graduate from these MBA programs are almost certainly assured of a good job offer.

In the U.S., regional accreditation agencies oversee schools in well-described regional areas. These are the Middle State Association of Colleges and schools (Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, District of Columbia and Delaware).

New England Association of Schools and Colleges (Vermont, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine and Connecticut).

North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (Wyoming, Wisconsin, West Virginia, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, North Dakota, New Mexico, Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, Michigan, Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Colorado, Arkansas and Arizona).

Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges (Washington, Utah, Oregon, Nevada, Montana, Idaho and Alaska).

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (Virginia, Texas, Tennessee, South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida and Alabama).

Western Association of Schools and Colleges (Pacific Basin, Hawaii and California).

The most reputable MBA accreditor is the AACSB. It does recognize a limited number of online MBA programs. DETC accredits the majority of online MBA programs—look for regional accreditation to ensure a high-quality program.

If you attend and participate in an unaccredited MBA program, you run the risk of being refused a certification, should you major in a business field requiring that its employees hold a certificate. A high level of on-the-job performance is more likely if you choose and graduate from an accredited online MBA program.

AACSB has focused on quality issues in distance learning (online programs). This focus was on gaining insight on issues relevant to quality distance learning.

Finally, accreditation verifies that an online MBA program is trustworthy, certified and of high quality. All schools accredited by a agency are required to maintain high standards that have been spelled out by learning commissions. Courses from accredited programs provide a curriculum that prepares you for successful employment post-graduation.