Resorting Responsibilities
A. Lee Fritschler
Arthur M. Hauptman
CHEA
25 January 2011
Assessing Quality in Higher Education
Unit of Analysis
Means of Quality Assessment
Student/Graduate
Classroom grades; Portfolio assessments; Board certifications
Faculty
Student evaluations; Peer reviews of research and teaching
Department
Periodic peer reviews; accreditation department reviews
Institution
Periodic institution-wide accreditation review; media rankings
State
State-wide standardized tests; Graduation rate comparisons
Nation
International comparisons of attainment and completion rates
Resorting Responsibilities:
Stop, Start, and Continue
Government
Accreditation
Institutions
Stop
- proposing to ask graduates
for their incomes (federal)
- trying to become more
involved in curricular and
student learning evaluations
- requiring that accreditors
conduct inst financial
audits (federal)
- doing financial aid
reviews of parental and
student income
Start
- being primarily responsible
for financial audits (federal)
- requiring insts to pay fee for
each default attributable to
their student borrowers
- allowing parents to check
off on taxes to apply for aid
- developing qualifications
frameworks for U.S.
- building departmental
peer reviews more into
accreditation process
- using enrollment
growth without price
increases as means to
raise productivity
Continue
- being primarily responsible
for new program approval
(states)
- return to traditional role of
ensuring due process in
accreditation
- being primarily
responsible for academic
reviews of insts
- doing periodic peer
reviews of departments
and schools
- relying on faculty as
primary assessors of
quality