I spent an hour or so writing a post that included pictures and a report of my time today at Russo-Steele. For some reason the post didn't work. It looks fine on my computer but I got a report it was all garbled. Messed up. So here's a partial re-write sans anything about the auction. No pics, no narrative. I put some of the photos on my Facebook page so if you're over there you can see them. The rest will wait until tomorrow night. Maybe the blogger software will like it more then.
In the "you can't make this stuff up" department...
Remember that they found somebody's severed head up by the Hollywood sign in L.A.? Later they found two hands and two feet.
A local headline here reads: "Severed head, hands and feet aren't connected to a torso discovered in Tucson."
And now, let's see if I can re-create the:
(cont'd from earlier posts)
Every benefit has associated costs, and accreditation is no exception. The most obvious are the fees charged by the accrediting agency. The initial application process involves writing and submitting volumes of reports and documentation on every aspect of the institution, requiring hundreds of hours of work. An inspection team of 3-5 then spends several days on site, with all costs born by the institution (travel, lodging, meals, etc.). It's not unusual for there to be follow-up reports required on specific areas of concern and another visit by the team. From the initial application to probationary accreditation can take about three years. Yeah, hundreds of hours.
This process is repeated every 2-3 years until the accrediting agency feels the institution is consistently meeting accrediting standards across the broad range of areas - procurement, faculty, facilities, budget, etc. - at which time the interval between visits is extended to five or more years.
But that's not the most significant cost.
It's entirely appropriate and reasonable for the agency to say, "If you want our imprimatur you will meet our standards in each area." In some areas that may mean significant changes to the status quo. For example, if the agency says, "Your library is inadequate for a college where students are expected to do research and writing in their field of study," the college has to decide if they're going to enhance, maybe enlarge their library to meet the agency's requirement or forego accreditation.
Hey, that's the way the world works.
And if they say, "Your course requirements for Degree X are not appropriate. You should require more courses in Division Y" a similar decision will have to be made.
That's why some very good colleges, both for-profit and non-profit, choose to do without accreditation. To put it bluntly, they don't want someone else telling them how to do their work - what their priorities should be, the size of their budget, the condition of their facilities, etc. It's the same dynamic at work when some private colleges decide to turn down any federal funds. It's NOT unreasonable for the govt. to say, "If we're going to give you money you have to meet these standards." The specific standards may be unreasonable, but nobody would argue the govt. should hand out money without some measure of accountability to established prerequisites.
So the benefits of accreditation must be weighed against the ceding of some independence and autonomy to the accrediting agency. That seems pretty self-evident but it's in the details that it can get tricky.
Going back to an earlier part of this discussion, all private colleges and universities must pay attention to their bottom line. Accreditation can help by saying to prospective students, "We're a legit institution as this accreditation indicates." But it also can raise costs by requiring them to do expensive things they would not otherwise do, like hire additional faculty, build additional facilities, and add programs. Hopefully these aren't too intrusive and the cost/benefit ratio works to the institution's clear advantage. But it doesn't always work out that way. At the very least, prospective students and their parents should understand the compromises an institution has made.
(to be cont'd)
No comments:
Post a Comment