Aligning accreditation and academic program reviews: a Canadian case study
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-11-2016-0061 |
| Published date | 03 July 2017 |
| Pages | 287-302 |
| Date | 03 July 2017 |
| Author | Lynne Bowker |
Aligning accreditation and
academic program reviews:
a Canadian case study
Lynne Bowker
School of Translation and Interpretation and School of Information Studies,
University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to investigate the potential benets and limitations associated with aligning
accreditation and academic program reviews in post-secondary institutions, using a descriptive case study
approach.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper describes two Canadian graduate programs that are
subject to both external professional accreditation and institutional cyclical reviews, as they underwent an
aligned review. The process was developed as a collaborative effort between the academic units, the
professional associations and the university’s graduate-level quality assurance ofce. For each program, a
single self-study was developed, a single review panel was constituted, and a single site visit was conducted.
The merits and challenges posed by the alignment process are discussed.
Findings –Initial feedback from the academic units suggests that the alignment of accreditation and
program reviews is perceived as reducing the burden on programs with regard to the time and effort invested
by faculty, staff and other stakeholders, as well as in terms of nancial expenses. Based on this feedback, along
with input from reviewers and program evaluation committee members, 14 recommendations emerged for
ways in which an aligned review process can be set up for success.
Practical implications –The results suggest that aligned reviews are not only resource-efcient but also
allow reviewers to provide more holistic feedback that faculty may be more willing to engage with for program
enhancement.
Originality/value –The present study contributes to the existing body of knowledge about conducting
aligned reviews in response to external accreditation requirements or institutional needs. It summarizes the
potential benets and limitations and offers recommendations for potential best practices for carrying out
aligned reviews for policymakers and practitioners.
Keywords Academic program review, Cyclical review, Professional accreditation,
Alignment of reviews, Resource-efcient assessment, Institutional quality assurance process
Paper type Case study
Introduction
Countries around the world, including Canada, have recognized the importance of quality
assurance (QA) in post-secondary education and have implemented processes for academic
program review (Tam, 1999;Brown, 2004;Mora, 2004;Shah et al., 2011;Weinrib and Jones,
2014). Essentially, QA involves implementing a series of ongoing processes and policies that
are intended to maintain and continuously improve academic program standards. QA
The author is grateful for the collaboration of University of Ottawa colleagues in the School of
Rehabilitation Sciences and the School of Social Work, in particular Paulette Guitard and Marie Drolet.
Invaluable support and feedback was also provided by Jeela Jones and Michael Urgolo, Ofce of Quality
Assurance in the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies, and by Silvia Bonaccio, Telfer School
of Management. The cooperation of the CAOT and the CASWE, as well as the members of the various
review panels, is also appreciated.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Aligning
accreditation
287
Received 1 November 2016
Revised 23 March 2017
26 April 2017
Accepted 27 April 2017
QualityAssurance in Education
Vol.25 No. 3, 2017
pp.287-302
©Emerald Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/QAE-11-2016-0061
processes in higher education institutions include assessing, monitoring, guaranteeing,
maintaining and improving system-wide processes and outcomes (Vla˘sceanu et al., 2007,
p. 74). In Canada, the QA system is multi-layered, and the roles are shared among provincial
and/or regional authorities and the post-secondary institutions themselves.
Additionally, in Canada, external accreditation is the process by which university
programs in professional elds (e.g. physiotherapy, library science) are subjected to external
review and accreditation by professional bodies at the relevant provincial, national or
international levels. Accreditation by professional bodies ensures that the content of
university programs, teaching resources and research outputs are of consistently high
quality to meet competency expectations and to support future professionals in their area of
expertise. As a process, accreditation is used to evaluate whether a program meets certain
pre-determined minimal criteria or standards set by external bodies (Vla˘sceanu et al., 2007,
p. 25). One common procedural characteristic of both accreditation and academic program
reviews is the development of a self-study process by the program undergoing review.
According to the Macmillan English Dictionary,alignment means “the organization of
activities or systems so that they match or t well together”. There is a burgeoning interest
in learning more about the potential benets and limitations of aligning the processes
involved in academic program reviews with those involved in professional accreditation
reviews (Guitard and Savard, 2016,p.5;Materu, 2007, p. 53). Post-secondary institutions
devote considerable time and resources toward assessing and reporting on the quality of
their programs and in fullling the requirements set out by provincial authorities and
accreditation bodies. Both types of review processes can be rigorous and demanding, and
they require a considerable investment on the part of an academic unit.
Programs are typically reviewed on a cycle that ranges between ve and ten years, and
formal preparation for each review could span several years. Given that the vast majority of
academic units offer multiple programs, some of which may require both institutional and
professional accreditation reviews, it is not unusual for these units to be in a near constant
state of preparing for a program review or fullling a reporting requirement. There are
numerous accounts in the literature suggesting that faculty and staff members often view
these preparations and reporting processes as labour-intensive and time-consuming (Jones
and Darshi de Saram, 2005,p.52;Strydom et al., 2004, p. 213; Cardoso et al., 2016, p. 952).
Given this contingency, Subramony et al. (2015) were recently motivated to explore the
possibility of aligning program reviews and national/state accreditation reviews at Northern
Illinois University in the USA. In their paper entitled “Towards an aligned accreditation and
program review process: Institutional case study”, Subramony et al. (2015) outline their
efforts to collaborate with different programs and administrative units to develop prototypes
of aligned standards with a view toward creating a resource-efcient assessment system.
Meanwhile, there is evidence of a growing interest in nding ways to maximize efciency
in the program review process in Canada as well. For instance, the topic of aligning
accreditation and program reviews was on the agenda for the 2016 “Quality Assurance Key
Contacts Meeting”. This meeting, which is organized annually by the Ontario Universities
Council on Quality Assurance (OUCQA), targets faculty and staff who are responsible for
managing the QA processes in the 23 publicly assisted universities in the province of
Ontario, Canada. At the 2016 meeting, the program included a two-hour interactive session
entitled “Making Quality Assurance Work”. During the session, ve specic QA-related
challenges were raised, and participants were asked to weigh in with questions, comments,
suggestions or experiences. One of the ve challenges to be addressed was “Alignment of
accreditation and Institutional Quality Assurance Process program reviews”.
QAE
25,3
288
To continue reading
Request your trial