Internet Learning Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2012 | Page 69

68

Internet Learning

Commission on Institutions of Higher Education 2009a). This was emphasized by P21 when
discussing how each institution was reviewed based on its mission and goals comparative to how
well appropriate content, learning outcomes, varied assessment methods, and qualified faculty
for subject and teaching are used to ensure quality education. Explained by P15, standards were
in place to establish minimal requirements and expectations for attainment. The Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools’ “Principles of Accreditation” (2009) indicated established
standards for the region’s institutions. Wheelen (2009), then president of Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools, responded to a report issued by Scott (2009c), Assistant Inspector
General, U.S. DOE. In the letter Wheelen stressed that the commission, through evaluations and
peer reviews, held “institutions accountable for the academic quality of any and all [emphasis in
original] course work or credit recorded” (p. 2) by a school. It is through the peer review process
that quality education is ensured and is related to the institution’s mission. Peer reviewers
evaluate an institution’s courses and learning outcomes and degree programs are suitable for the
collegiate level (Wheelan 2009).
Although responsibility for determining credit hour values and maintaining academic
rigor was at the institution level, the accrediting commissions were liable for ensuring
compliance to prescribed standards. Credit hour variance between institutions was expected.
Within New England commission’s documentation, discussion on how peer reviews work in
favor of supporting quality education. Yet, the commission realizes that the accreditation and
review process are “not an equalizing force, measuring every institution by a uniform set of
quantitative standards” (New England Association of Schools and Colleges Commission on
Institutions of Higher Education 2009a, 4). The DOE explained that credit hours would vary.
The reliance of following acceptable higher-education practices permitted variance, but assumed
basic academics were compatible (U.S. Department of Education 2010a; U.S. Network for
Education Information 2008b).
The Western Association of Schools and Colleges require institutions to prove
themselves and that “academic credits [are] based on generally accepted practices” (Western
Association of Schools and Colleges Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and
Universities 2010b, 7). As with other commissions, the Western Association requires institutions
to demonstrate that any alternative instructional format is comparable to traditional in-class
learning (Council of Regional Accrediting Commissions 2009; Western Association of Schools
and Colleges Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities 2010c). Institutional
proof and demonstration was also required in New England (2009a; 2009b) and Middle States
(2009a; 2009b; 2011b) associations. At the institutional level decisions are made that impact on
credit hours and the associated learning. The regional commissions then evaluate institutional
determinations and practices to ensure quality education.
As presented, the responsibility of credit hours is at the local level. A common theme in
the interviews is that accreditation reviews look for the appropriate academic content and rigor.
P13 discussed at length the importance of awarding accreditation based on how well institutions
meet learning objectives appropriate to the academic level. P11 also emphasized many times that
“content and rigor” were the focus of the region’s evaluations. Both Manning (2009; 2011a;
2011b) and Wheelan (2009) described how each region, respectively, was more concerned about
learning and outcomes. Accreditation reviews would assess each institution’s ability to provide
appropriate academic content, length, and rigor in curricular choices. Although credit hours were
used as a metric, reviewers looked for demonstrated evidence that an institution’s choices were
comparable to other higher-education institutions.