Amy Vujaklija and Joi Patterson discuss the importance and challenges of accreditation in higher education. They emphasize that accreditation ensures educational quality, public trust, and equity. Amy shares her anxiety about accreditation, while Joi highlights the emotional and logistical burdens it imposes. They note that accreditation involves continuous improvement, transparency, and compliance with state and national standards. Despite its costs and bureaucracy, accreditation is crucial for maintaining program relevance, student outcomes, and institutional reputation. They also discuss the role of specialized accreditation in specific fields and the importance of aligning institutional missions with accreditation standards.

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Accreditation, educational quality, public trust, compliance, continuous improvement, regional accreditation, specialized accreditation, student outcomes, program standards, institutional standards, external framework, equity, accountability, stakeholder engagement, higher education.

SPEAKERS

Amy Vujaklija, Joi Patterson

The colleges and universities that are regionally accredited offer assurances that that institution maintains a certain standard of quality. Teaching and leading are rewarding but complex,

and whether you're in a classroom or a campus, new challenges are always emerging.

I'm Amy Vujaklija.

I'm Joi Patterson, and this is teaching and leading, where we explore teaching, leadership, equity and the systems that shape education

and how educators can grow, explore and have a meaningful impact as teachers and leaders. So let's get into it. Hello. Dr Joi, hi.

Dr Amy, how are you? I'm doing well. And you know, this conversation is going to be about our favorite topic, accreditation, yay.

And then it's really odd that we find such interest and fascination

with choice of words, right, right?

Like, I don't know if it brings us joy, but it certainly can bring some fulfillment, doesn't it fulfillment? Yes. Okay, so this is just part of a series of conversations, and we want to really unpack all the different elements of accreditation, but first really talking about its foundations. What emotions come from just talking about accreditation,

what it is, and does accreditation still matter? So let's do it. Amy, sounds good. Okay, so I want to know. Okay, so your reaction, before we get all into it, when you hear the word accreditation, or when people hear the word accreditation, what emotions come up?

Oh, that just invoked a little bit of nervousness and anxiety for me, actually. But I want to go back, because I've been through this process and so have you. Yes, we know that accreditation requires that highest level of commitment to detail, quality, continuous improvement and maintaining or seeking accreditation calls for humility. We have to recognize areas for improvement, and the accrediting agencies really ask us to publicly lift the veil on those imperfections we may have now,

and that's hard. Yes, listen to your your weekly or your monthly meeting with your team, and you know they've ignored the fact that accreditation is coming because they were so happy when the last one was over. What kind of emotions does it say we're prepping for the next accreditation?

Well, I actually said that our last site visit was in May of 2025 our continued accreditation letter was received in November of 2025, yay. But in Yes, yay. But in June of 2025, I had already created a folder on my computer that said, site visit 2032 and when I said that at our last faculty meeting, I had some eyes when we're rolling. Some of them were wide, and some of

them were probably looking at their retirement date, seeing if they could retire before the next accreditation.

Yes, but we know okay. So we know that the instinct for self preservation, that facade of perfection, that's what we want to present whenever we are writing these reports and showing the world who we are. But I think that's a fatal flaw, and it can be really scary to be transparent and to act, you know, ask for ways to improve,

yeah, and even the compliance part, you know, so many people, I know we have the reactions of fear and anxiety, and this is going to be A lot of work. So we have those emotions. But some people, you know, they also feel like it's the burden, and this kind of big brother is watching you, this burden of this compliance requirement, because it's associated such timelines and heavy. Documentation. And of course, we know it's going to be a lot of increased work, and some people are just not looking forward to that. In general,

we have to think about this, about the minimum compliance. Though minimum compliance should never be the standard. We have minimum standards that are set forth by our state. States across the nation have minimum standards for licensure, for instance, but our goal should be to find creative, meaningful, efficient and effective ways to be both compliant and provide best experiences, learning, advising, mentoring for all our stakeholders. Say stakeholders, when we say stakeholders, those are students, faculty, staff, administrators, in our case for Educator licensure, type of accreditation, that's with our district administrators and our schools, our teachers in the classroom, who are our mentors, compliance. I don't think that's accreditation.

No, no, no. I'm just referring to the feelings exactly, going back to the feelings of it, and that is the feeling that comes with it. Because one could say that I could have a very strong, rigorous program that exceeds the standards without accreditation. So accreditation is just that body that certifies us right to say that your institution has met the minimum qualifications of these standards. So you know, the emotions that come through it as well as the expense, right? So we can't doubt that there's an expense, there's time, there's expense, and like you said, you've already created a folder for your next accreditation. So you're taking off some of the burden, right? And you're making you're using accreditation as your system, so to say, of how to get a lot of things done and get a lot of people to comply with you, or, you know, to get some buy in. And so you're using that, and you're setting yourself up so it's less burdensome, but you're going to do that Amy, whether a body was telling you to do this or not. So that's why I say the two are not necessarily synonymous. I can have a very quality program without accreditation, and it's just some of the emotions that come when you hear the word accreditation, because you are being assessed, you are being judged. There is a timeline, and there is funding associated with this. You know, there's a hefty Bill associated with it, so I'm glad that you're taking the steps to relieve some of the burdens that your team, that many teams typically experience with accreditation. I mean, some people, I mean, it will draw you to tears. Sometimes, if you're not prepared, if you're seeing it as something that you've put aside, and it's not incorporated in your day to day system, then it creates an animal all of its own. Right. It can be extremely hectic, and it's just not good for anyone when you do that. So lesson learned, and we've learned a lot through this process of making sure that we use it as part of our daily system and cycles

and in small ways, instructors and professors use reflective practice. Every semester, we are constantly asking ourselves, did students leave the class having learned what the objectives stated they were supposed to learn? We ask those questions at the program level, and we ensure program maintains relevance in the highest standards having an external body to guide you through that process and to provide standards to help you with that analysis, I think, is really beneficial now, examining the curriculum, analyzing data, revising assignments and rubrics to better align and meet those national standards that definitely it requires a serious investment of time knowledge of all the moving parts in the program and is extremely overwhelming, but you will never learn your program. The interconnectedness of programs or the university better than when you are going through an accreditation process.

I totally agree.

I'm curious, when was your first foray into a national reporting type of like either accreditation or national recognition. When did you just dive in and learn those nuts and bolts?

You know, I was, I was thrust into this and so accreditation, and I'm trying to think of when did it mean anything to me? I think when I went to undergrad and I started at a community college, accreditation didn't mean anything to me, however, it meant a little bit to me when I went to a four year university, and what it meant to me more than anything as a student and undergrad was transferability of making sure. So, you know, people have told me, and so the first thing I would look for on a website is making sure that university is accredited, making sure that program is accredited. And I associated that for me, of making sure that it was transferable if I wanted to go to another university, and that I was going to receive my license after I completed the program. So that's what it meant for me as a student. But once I was working in higher ed, my first experience was thrust upon me, so they didn't include this in the job interview, so in the job so once I took on the position of a director and over assessment, then I learned that, oh, our accreditation review is in two years. You and I know it takes more than two years to prepare, because it's an ongoing preparation. They have not prepared. And so that was my first time, so And for me, and you know, I like organization, I like charts, I like all of that. So I had to first work, to put the system together before I could delve into the work. And I think that was part of my saving grace, that I couldn't function in the chaos. So I first had to create a system by which to collect and work in and assess and evaluate and benchmarks and all the all of the things. And the more you do it, you know, the better you get at it, and you learn to really respect it and appreciate it.

I think that was why I came to appreciate it so much now is my first introduction to accreditation reports. Was my first semester in a tenure track position in higher ed and the National specialized professional organization or association, that spa report is just a slice of that larger accreditation by Cape the Council of Accreditation of Educator Preparation. And as I was saying earlier, you don't know how deeply you can go down a rabbit rabbit hole, learning about a program and how it interconnects and all of the rubrics and all of the data the people who complete your program, how well they're doing and where they are, until you put it together and that curriculum became kind of my baby. It was like, child number four or something,

yeah, yeah. It gets a lot of attention, you know. And so some people wonder about, like, what's the big deal with accreditation? Well, some accreditations we're required to do, right? So at the state level, we don't have a choice of making sure that you're meeting the normal standards, whether you're in health care, education and other fields like these are the minimal qualifications you have to meet. Some guidelines at the local level, right at the state and local level, and then we have our national accreditation right, which is where we spend the money and a lot of time and a lot of energy, and what's the point of it? And what does that do for our reputation? You know, I always felt like it gives me some bragging rights. Number one, which is a high price to pay for bragging rights, so maybe not, but it gives you some bragging rights saying that I've achieved this national level, and they've examined us, and here's their seal of approval. So we need some external bodies saying that we're doing what we're. Supposed to do. So it does kind of give you some bragging rights. But I also think that people who are say going to graduate school students, they are looking to see who you are accredited through. And it does matter to them, because they kind of it gives them assurance that I'm coming from a very, very, very quality program. What do you think about the reputation that accreditation has had across the institution?

I will have to agree that it it seems like it's being raked over the coals and dragged through the mud. And you know, what's the point of accreditation, especially when you think about the regional accreditations, when that is how we think about transferability of credits. If it's an accredited institution, we can guarantee certain value for the course being offered, and how that value can be translated and transferred into another institution. I think it's the cost and the bureaucracy that can sometimes come under attack when what we experience on our side of things, I know it's best practice, and whenever you think about the cost of that best practice, can it be done a different way? Sure it could. But what kind of systematized process might there be that would ensure that this program at this x University is comparable and is of the same value and quality as this same program at y University. So then we have to back up, and we have to think beyond that and beyond the reputation of the universities, beyond the time and intensive process of an accreditation, what problem is accreditation meant to solve?

Yeah, you know, at its very core, I mean accreditation exists to ensure educational quality, right? But it also ensures public trust. So because you have it, people can trust that you have a quality program, and thus they can spend their money at your organization, you know. So you want your students, the families, policymakers, all of them to know that our institution is going to do what we claim that is going to do. People also know that we have an external framework for accountability, that we have student center outcomes, that we follow a system for diverse candidates, all of those things. So I think at its core, it really establishes public trust. And I would say this is kind of synonymous. Can you imagine if we had no standards for food that you buy in a grocery store? How do you when you go into the grocery store and you're buying purchasing meat. If you eat meat and it has USDA on it, or something like that, what does that say to you? That's kind of a public trust seal to you, right? And even without you knowing the standards, you know that there are some standards, and that this meat went through that standard. When you see seals like that from a student perspective or a policymaker perspective, you associate that with some kind of external standards of someone saying that you have educational quality and you meet all of these rigorous expectations. And so it's really about public trust, I think, more than anything,

I want to add to that, I think also it's about equity. So within the university, we, of course, have several levels of internal approvals, and then we have our state level. And let me speak for educator preparation programs, because those are the ones I'm the most familiar with. So we have faculty, level, chair, Dean, university approvals to create and maintain a program. Licensure programs must be aligned to state standards and presented to a state licensure board, and this is common with most all states. And then, if there are any new standards, they have to be realigned and submitted for another review. And then, when we think about regional accreditation, that encompasses a group of states, and that ensures that. Each college and university in that region meets standards for high graduation rates and retention program outcomes. So one thing about accreditation is that programs need to be sustainable and demonstrate positive employment outcomes, they need to demonstrate equity and access across face to face on campus classes online or hybrid off campus versions of the same course or the same program need to be comparable to the on campus versions. So colleges and universities that are regionally accredited offer assurances that that institution maintains a certain standard of quality, right?

And I think it really keeps us honest, right? It keeps us true to what we said, that we're going to do in a very, very systematic way. I don't know about you, but I've used it kind of as a bully. Sometimes, maybe that's not the best word to use, but sometimes things like this have hard buy in. But I've used it to help me when I'm leading a team or if not buy in, if they don't have that natural buy in to do this, then there's the boogeyman, you know, over our shoulder, making sure that we get this done. So it really does keep us honest and true to what we said we were going to do again, going back to public trust. But you know, there's different types of accreditation. Of course, you and I are most familiar with what happens in higher ed at the institutional level and at the programmatic level, and there are some differences between other organizations, whether it's healthcare or counseling, or even P 12, there are some differences in how they function. There's not the expense associated with it, right? And you have some programs too, where there's no expense associated with it, if you're meeting the state requirements of just the foundational standards, whereas all the other bells and whistles that you talked about in terms of equity and diversity, and you know some of the data that you're collecting to ensure that students are actually graduating and they're getting jobs, which is kind of what you're there for.

You started to talk just a little bit about this specialized accreditation. And so if we're talking about so many internal approvals, and then we have regional accreditation, why would we seek accreditation for specific areas like, for instance, the American Speech Language Hearing Association, so Asha accredits graduate programs in communication disorders. We have that the Council for Accreditation of counseling and related educational programs. Krep accredits our graduate counseling programs. The Council on Social Work Education accredits our social work programs. And we have agencies for health, nursing, business occupational therapy, physical therapy, public administration, and many that our programs qualify for and have so when we think about the multiple layers, and you think, Well, yes, you can have an approved program without seeking that additional accreditation from specialized agencies, but then you look at the academic requirements. Like, for instance, it might be a 2.0 for state approval, but an accrediting agency might require a 3.0 or a specific faculty credentials, you know, full time versus adjunct or efforts to maintain mutually beneficial partnerships, like community stakeholders and data driven continuous improvement. So my thought is that the problem that accreditation is meant to solve is the crapshoot of entering college and selecting a meaningful degree program and then leaving college with the ability to earn a living and pay off student loans, who I don't want to roll dice, right? My future outcome?

Yeah, but one would also say, just because you're accredited, does that necessarily mean that you are an excellent program? I know. That when times are tough and the budget is low, accreditation is one of those things that you have to consider, right? And so you've been hearing that a lot. There's a lot of institutions that are moving away from national accreditation because of the expense, because they think it may be outdated or bureaucratic, and so, you know, some of those critiques are fair, you know, especially if you're making the improvements in your documentation right, and if your students are not connected, and if you're not really making an impact for the student, where the students are feeling seen, the students feel like they belong. The students are thriving, the students are, you know, passing the test, the students are persisting and completing. You can certainly pass accreditation and those things not occurring, it is fair that it can be bureaucratic, you know, and so certain people have different feelings, but it's important that it really reflects the program. So I think at its very heart, you have to align your mission to that of the accreditation. And if you can do that, and if you can buy into the fact that if we do this, we're going to be a much better program because of it, then I say absolutely do it. But if you're doing it for the purpose of bragging rights, because you can pay someone, you know, you can actually pay a consultant to do your accreditation, and it looks great on paper, and you can pass accreditation. My it's a little harder when it's an on site visit. And now accrediting bodies, many of them, are moving away from on site visits, right? And so I think it bears a lot for the institution, the institutional leader, right, that regardless of accreditation, there is a university standard of excellence. And if you have this university standard of excellence, and if they're doing all the checking all those boxes like you are, in addition to that, you have a system by which you're doing that. Then it makes accreditation pretty easy, you know? And it's just a feather in your cap because you are already doing the work,

and now it's just a matter of doing the work. Yes, I love having these conversations with you. Joi, I think in so many ways, we have a lot of that. The same ideas about accreditation, but the way we've approached it, and the kinds of questions you ask and the way you think about that opposing view is really interesting to me. And kind of pushes, pushes my thinking,

Yeah, you know, I like the organization of it, so I'm someone that actually appreciate and respect accreditation, and I think that things can get lost without it, and I think it's hard to lead a team without it. And so again, I think having that in place have a lot of value, but I also feel like we can, if a system is in place, we can have value, even without it.

Thanks for listening to teaching and leading with Dr Amy and Dr Joi.

This podcast is supported by Governor State University.

Show Notes and resources for this episode are available at G, O, v, s, t.edu/ st.edu/teachingandleadingpodcast,

until next time,

keep growing

as teachers

and leaders.