Home IQRA Society for Career Guidance Career & Courses Guide
About Us Contact Us
Business Emails  | Colleges  | Hyderabad Jobs  | Bangalore Jobs  | Delhi Jobs  | Mumbai Jobs  | Classifieds  | Yellow Pages

Chapter 8: Recognition, Accreditation and Ranking of Institutions

Introduction

In India, there is no system of accreditation of educational institutions as this process operates in the USA. What we have, instead, is the system of recognition by the concerned State government and affiliation by a university in whose jurisdiction the institution is located. A professional college similarly needs the recognition of the concerned State governments as well as university affiliation. In addition, as stated in Chapter 7 (Regulatory Authorities), it must also be recognised, and its courses approved by the relevant regulatory authority, e.g., recognition and approval for engineering colleges and courses including the intake capacity by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE).

In the USA, there are two methods for determining the standards and quality of extraordinarily diverse postsecondary educational programmes offered by a large number or colleges and universities: 1. accreditation, and 2. quality ranking.

Accreditation

Accreditation is a kind of “seal of approval” indicating that an academic institution has been recognised as providing at least an adequate education. It has been defined by the United States Department of Education s “the process whereby and agency or association grants public recognition to a school, institute, college, university or specialised programme of study, which meets certain established qualifications and education standards, as determined through initial periodic evaluations. The essential purpose of the accreditation process is to provide a professionals judgement as to the quality of the education institution or program(s) offered and to encourage continual improvement thereof”. (US Department of Education. Nationally Recognised Accrediting Agencies and Associations. Washington DC, June 1975. p.8) the process thus instils confidence of the education community and of the public that the educational institutions serve.

The US System

The procedure for accreditation of an institution of higher education in the USA typically involves five steps:

1.  The establishment of standards,

2.  Institutions self-study in which its performance is measured against established standards,

3.  On-site evaluation by a team of outside educators selected by the accrediting agency,

4.  Publication of the fact that the institution met the standards,

5.  Periodic re-evaluation of the institutions programmes.

Accreditation in the USA enables students to move freely form one accredited institution to another. Financial aid, from both government and private sources, is usually given only to those students who attend accredited institutions. This recognition is extended primarily through non-government voluntary institutions or professionals associations. Generally, accreditation is granted for a specific term, e.g., for five or ten years. Accrediting bodies reserve the right to review member institutions or programmes at any time.

Accreditation is of two types – institutional and Specialised. Institutional accreditation involves 1. an evaluation of an entire institution in respect of its stated mission and the accreditation of the institution as a whole, and 2. the assessment of such characteristics as student personnel services, the financial condition of the institution and administrative efficiency. Institutional accreditation is provided by national and regional accrediting associations which restrict their scope to particular kinds of institutions.

There are eight national and eight regional accrediting bodies. On the other hand, “Specialised” accreditation or “Programme” accreditation involves the evaluation of specific units, schools or programmes within an institution with regard to effectiveness in preparing students for their chosen professions. There are more than 40 specialised accrediting bodies. Most of them are programmes association which has set up their councils, commissions, committees or boards for this purpose.

An apex body, the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is responsible for according recognition to the accrediting bodies. It succeeded two earlier bodies: viz., Council or postsecondary Accreditation (COPA), dissolved on December 31, 1993 and the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation (COPRA), dissolved on December 31, 1996. However, not all the accrediting bodies seek the recognition of CHEA. For example, two of the more prominent professionals accrediting bodies, the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business and the National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) are not affiliated to CHEA. The American Council of Education publishes Accrediting Institutions of Postsecondary Education, Programmes and Candidates for Accreditation, an annual publication.

Systems in Some Other Countries

In the United Kingdom, there are no accreditation agencies similar to those in the USA, but some kind of evaluation is done by such agencies as the advisory Board of Research Council, the Council of Principals of the United Kingdom (CVCP) and the Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC), established by the CVCP. The Division of Quality Audit of HEQC replaced CVCP and is called Academic Audit Unit (AAU). The AAU was established to investigate, monitor and promote academic standards and to ensure that universities achieve their aims and objectives.

Among the wide range of publications brought out by the CVCP are such titles as Academic Standards in Universities (Reynolds Report), 1986, Total Quality management, 1991, Quality Assurance in Universities, 1991. In Australia, Academic Standards Panel had been established in some disciplines to oversee the standard of undergraduate programmes. In New Zealand, the New Zealand Vice-chancellors’ Committee had constituted a Committee on University Programmes in order to carry out course approval and accreditation functions.

The Indian Scene

Although in India there is no accreditation system as prevailing in the USA, introduction of “a mechanism for accreditation and assessment for maintaining and raising the quality of education” was emphasised by the National Policy on Education (1986). Three Committees appointed by the University Grants Commission – V.R. Gowariker Committee (1986), Sukumaran Nair Committee (1990) and G. Ram Reddy Committee (1990) deliberated on this issue. Eventually, the national assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) came into existence in 1994.

There are also four other accrediting agencies: 1. National Board of Accreditation (NBA) set up by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for accrediting engineering and technical institutions, 2. Accreditation Board set up by the Indian Council of Agricultural Resource (ICAR) for accrediting agricultural colleges, 3. Department of Electronics Accreditation system (DOEACC) for accrediting private computer institutions and 4. National Board of Examination (NBE), an autonomous body of the Ministry of the Health and Family Welfare for accrediting hospitals and institutions which prepare candidates for securing postgraduate and postdoctoral qualifications in different medical disciplines.

It may be noted that the NAAC and NBA award grades to accredited institutions unlike the accrediting system in the USA. The American version of grading is the ranking of institutions using specific criteria. This has been discussed in a subsequent section.

National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC): NAAC (2/4 Aragini Bhavana, Dr. Raj Kumar Road, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore-560010) has been established in accordance with Section 12 CCC of the UGC Act, 1956. It is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act. The objective of NAAC is “to assess and accredit institutions of higher learning in India, Universities and Colleges or one or more of their units, i.e., departments, schools, institutions, programmes, etc.

The assessment and accreditation are to be base on the following criteria: 1. institutional mission and objectives, 2. organisation and governance, 3. infrastructural facilities, 4. quality of teaching and learning, 5. curriculum design and review, 6. support services (library, laboratory, instrumentation, computer facilities etc.), 7. student services, 8. sources, adequacy and management of financial resource and 9. publications and consultancy/extension activities.

These critical would be reviewed periodically and revised and updated as and when considered necessary. Among the objectives of assessment and accreditation are 1. grading institutions of higher education and their programmes, 2. helping institutions realise their academic objectives, 3. encourage innovations, self-evaluation and accountability in higher education. The assessment and grading would be undertaken periodically.

The institutions are to be graded in descending order or standard form “A” to “E” level. Institutions obtaining “D” and “E’ level would be assessed for a review exercise after a two-year period, while the accrediting ones would retain the status for a five-year period. Not many universities and colleges have subjected themselves to the process. According to the available information, so far only 37 universities and about 200 colleges had requested the NAAC to undertake assessment. NAAC had succeeded in granting accreditation only to four universities and 60 colleges since 1994. However, the list of institutions so far assessed is not readily available. UGC has now made it mandatory for all institutions of higher learning to get themselves assessed and accredited by the end of 2000. UGC funding of institutions would now be linked with assessment and accreditation.

National Board of Accreditation (NBA): The NBA was set up by the AICTE in accordance with the provisions of Section 10(u) of the AICTE Act, 1987, which says that the objective of the NBA is “to periodically conduct evaluation of technical institutions or programmes on the basis guidelines, norms and standards specified by it and to make recommendations to it, or to the Council or to the Commission or to other bodies, regarding recognition or de-recognition or the institution or the programme.”

Accordingly, the NBA came into existence in September 1994. It functions independently within the AICTE. The need for accreditation or programmes in technical education arose in view of the extraordinary quantitative growth both in the number and types of technical institutions and programmes offered by them during the last 15 years.

“According to the NBA, accreditation is intended to accomplish, among other things, to assist the people, prospective students, educational institutions, professional societies, potential employers and government agencies in identifying those institutions and their specific progammes which meet the norms and standards prescribed by the Council:. The NBA would assess institutions offering courses form diploma to postgraduate levels in engineering and technology, architecture, pharmacy, town planning and management. Its assessment would cover the various related aspects of the institutions such as the “academic ambience, administrative infrastructure, physical resources, human resources, supporting systems like library resources, computational resources and avenues for moulding and developing the student’s personality and learning characteristics”.

NBA would accord accreditation not to the institution as a whole, but to each of the programmes offered by it. Only those programmes for which at least two batches have graduated are eligible for moulding and developing the student’s personality and learning characteristics”. NBA would accord accreditation not to the institution as a whole, but to each of the programmes offer by it. Only those programmes for which at least two batches have graduated are eligible for accreditation. Each programme would be graded into four categories depending on the rating received on a 1000 point scale:

  • “A” – Excellent/Very Good, i.e. meets all accreditation criteria or exceeds them,
  • “B” – Good, i.e., meets the minimum criteria and deficiencies are marginal and can be improved within a short period,
  • “C” – Satisfactory, i.e., deficiencies exist, but the institution has the potential to make up in the near future, say one to two years,
  • “NA” – Not accredited, i.e., not ripe for accreditation, in view or the seriousness of the deficiencies.

    The period of validity of the grading is also indicated. The parameters and criteria taken into consideration include efficiency of administration, content and objectives of curricula, number and qualifications of faculty and student profile, including admission criteria, academic performance, teaching-learning process, industry-institution interaction. The AICTE claims that the standards prescribed by the NBA would be world-class and therefore students taking AICTE accredited courses would be on parliament with worlds best engineering students.

    The NBA, which had earlier given option for engineering colleges to meet the criteria set by the AICTE to get the accreditation status, has now made this mandatory. While giving financial assistance, the AICTE would give priority to institutions which had bagged accreditation status for courses offered by them.

    The AICTE publishes at directory of accredited institutions. The list of accredited institutions is also available in the AICTE website (http://www.aicte.com). Till March 31, 265 programmes offered by 44 institutions have been accredited.

    Accreditation Board (Indian council of Agricultural Research): An Accreditation Board was constituted by the Council in place of Norms and Accreditation Committee, to advise the Council (i) in evaluation standards for accreditation of colleges and institutions and (ii) in evaluating academic programmes and periodically assessing the course curriculum to maintain standard of agricultural education.

    DOEACC Accreditation: In the wake of mushroom growth of private computer training institutes in the 1980’s, the Department of Electronics, Government of India introduced a system of accreditation known as the Department of Electronics Accreditation of Computer Courses (DOEACCO), to ensure the quality of computer education provided by them. The accreditation programmes is now operated by an autonomous body, DOEACC Society (Electronics Niketan, 6 CGO Complex, New Delhi-110003), now under the Ministry of Information Technology. It has designed curriculum for four levels of computer education: O (Foundation Course), A (equivalent to advanced diploma), B (equivalent to MCA degree), C (equivalent to M.Tech. degree).

    Private institutions are granted provisional accreditation for conducting courses for O, A B, C, levels based on the norms and criteria for that particular level of course. At present, there are more than 600 accredited institutions spread throughout the country. Examinations are conducted twice a year at important cities and towns all over India. The Society monitors the performance of accredited institutes which are expected to maintain a specified level and standard of infrastructure. The confirmation of accreditation depends on the performance of the students in the examinations. The courses are approved by the AICTE. Chapter 25 (computer and Information Technology) gives a brief account of the programmes.

    National Board of Examination (NBE) Accreditation: Yet another accreditation body is the National Board of Examination, an autonomous entity established by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in 1975. The aim of the Board is to elevate the standards of postgraduate examinations in different medical disciplines. It conducts postgraduate examinations of a high and uniform standard at he national level in 33 medical disciplines (See Chapter 43 – Medicine and Dentistry). The successful candidates are awarded the Diplomat of the National Board Certificate which is recognised and qualifications of the universities and are included in the First Schedule of the Medical Council Act, 1956.

    Another function of the Board is to accredit hospitals having adequate trained manpower and infrastructural facilities to train candidates to secure postgraduate and postdoctoral qualifications mentioned above. Evaluation of hospitals and institutions is carried out of specialists and the Accreditation Committed takes the decision on the basis of their reports. As of now, the Board has accorded recognition to about 145 hospitals and institutions.

    Quality Ranking

    The purpose of ranking educational institutions using certain measures is to assist students and their parents to compare the relative qualities of institutions and to choose form them. There are several such rankings undertaken annually by popular news magazines, whose ranking have received both admiration and flak are: US news and world Report, MacLean’s (Canada) and Times Higher Education Supplement (UK). Asiaweek, a weekly newsmagazine published from Hong Kong has for the first time ranked Asian business schools.

    US News and World Report

    Way back in 1983, the US News & World Report, a mass circulated weekly newsmagazine, started collecting data form educational institutions in the USA to rank them using several criteria. The US news now regularly compiles two ranking lists: 1. America’s Best Graduate Schools, 2. America’s Best Colleges. Best graduate schools in five major disciplines, viz., Business, Law, Medicine, Education and Engineering, are ranked annually and published in the magazine generally in March. Rankings are based on one subjective measure, “reputation”, and several objective measures, such as test score and faculty resources.

    Reputation, although a subjective measure, is considered a meaningful indicator of academic quality. A diploma or degree form and institution known for its academic excellence obviously leads to better jobs. Data on reputation are collected form two sources: 1. rating by deans and faculty members of schools with which they are familiar and 2. conducting surveys of people who are most likely to hire new graduates. Data on objective measures that account for the bulk of schools’ ranking are collected, with rare exception, form the schools themselves. There are two measures: 1. “inputs” or the qualities that students and schools bring to the educational experience and 2. “outputs” indicating how selective and rigorous a school programmes prepare the students.

    The input measures include 1. Standardised entrance examination scores (e.g., GMAT, GRE) and “undergraduate grade point average” which indicates how selective and rigorous a school programme is and 2. per student expenditure on institutions, libraries and student support services and the quantum of faculty research. The proportion of law school graduates employed nine months after graduation is and example of an ‘output’ measure, as is the median starting salary of new MBAs. Ranking methods for each discipline are explained in the magazine.

    Besides ranking the overall programmes, the US news also identifies the most outstanding ones in some of the larger specialties within each discipline on the basis of responses of academic experts. Graduate Schools in 29 disciplines, other than the five major ones mentioned earlier, are also ranked only by reputation, generally every three years. The ranking lists are published in the form of a guidebook tilted America’s Best Graduate Schools. Ranking of America’s best colleges cover “1400 plus” four-year accredited colleges and universities.

    The ranking of colleges and universities, by and large, is based on the methodology adopted for graduate schools. In addition, several other parameters are taken into consideration, for example, retention and “alumni giving rat”. Retention indicates whether a school is retaining those who enrol as freshmen. This is widely regarded as a measure of how satisfied students are with a school and whether it is providing courses and other services needed by students to graduate within six years. The “alumni giving rate”, i.e., the financial contributions made by past students to their ‘alma mater’ is considered a proxy for alumni satisfaction.

    However, in the world of higher education, the US news rankings are perennially controversial. Many colleges and universities do not like being ranked. They dub the ranking system as utterly misleading. Nevertheless, in the US News (August 31, 1998), a commentator observed that outside “a handful of highly selective institutions, most private colleges are under-subscribed. They need good students who can pay much more than such students need them. Annoyance at the rankings is partly a mask for fear that a bad ranking will lead to a drying up of applications and perhaps also of alumni contributions and government funding”.

    The editors of US News, however, advise that ranking is only one of the several other criteria students should consider in choosing an institution. It deserves mention here that ranking by two organisations of the same institution often has little correlation between changes in the ranking and may lead to confusion. For example, the Universities of Chicago, according to Business Week, slipped form third in 1994 to eighth in 1996 and went to occupy the third slot again in 1998. On the other hand, US News ranked Chicago sixth in all these three years.

    Besides the US news, the National Research Council of US, a private non-profit making body and the National Academy of Engineering also undertake ranking of institutions. In the area of business education, there are two sources: 1. The Princeton Review of the Best Business Schools and 2. Business week, a US business magazine. At the international level, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) of the internationally reputed economics magazine The Economist brings out annually, Which MBA? A critical guide to the world’s best MBAS courses base on extensive research and personal interviews with business schools and students. The tenth edition (1999) covers 100 business schools worldwide.

    MacLean’s

    It uses six group indicators each of which is assigned a weightage as shown in the parentheses:

    1.  Student body (20%),

    2.  Classes (18),

    3.  Faculty (20),

    4.  Finances (20),

    5.  Library (12) and

    6.  Reputation (20).

    Three categories of institutions are ranked separately:

    1.  Medical/doctoral universities,

    2.  comprehensive universities and

    3.  undergraduate universities.

    The reputation indicator used by MacLean’s is the main target of criticism by educationists.

    Times Higher Education Supplement

    In 1995 it had used 11 indicators for purposes of ranking which include (i) entry requirements, (ii) student library spending, (iv) first class honours, (v) international students, (vi) completion rates, (vii) unemployed, (viii) those pursuing higher studies/research.

    Asia Week

    The report published in its May 5, 200 issue has five ranking list: (i) 50 schools ranked exclusively by academic reputation, (ii) 46 schools offering full-time programmes, (iii) 30 schools offering part-time programmes, (iv) 16 schools offering executive programmes and (v) six schools offering distance or correspondence MBA programmes. The ranking or the second category is based on six criteria, viz., (i) academic reputation, (ii) 46 schools offering full-time programmes, (iii) 30 schools offering part0time programmes, (iv) 16 schools offering executive programmes and (v) six schools offering distance or correspondence MBA programmes.

    The ranking of the second category is based on six criteria, viz., (i) academic reputation (20%), (ii) student selectivity (20), (iii) faculty resource (20), (iv) linkages (15), (v) other resources (15) and (vi) graduate output (10). The ranking of the remaining categories is based on the first five measures, each with a weightage of 20%.

    India

    In India, the pioneering attempt to rank business, schools was made by Business Today, in collaboration with the Hyderabad-based COSMODE. It used three objective criteria, viz., (1) Students and Faculty Profile and curriculum, (2) Library, Classrooms and Residential Facilities and (3) Admissions and Placement and three subjective criteria viz., (1) Recruiter Score (2) Faculty Score and (3) Student’s Score. The report covered 422 AICTE recognised business schools. (Business Today, may 7, 1998). The AIMA and Business India have also ranked 317 business schools (Business India September 18, 2000) (See Update).

    Importing of Ranking

    Despite several negative features of the ranking system, there is a need in India for ranking, by independent agencies, to begin with, selected professional courses offered by recognised institution. Neither the stamp of affiliation given by universities nor the system of recognition of institutions and courses granted by the concerned regulatory authorities are necessarily measures of academic quality and excellence. The regulatory authorities do not have any effective mechanism to adopt timely corrective steps when things go wrong or take punitive measures against the defaulting ones.

    Thus, the very purpose of granting approval is defeated. There are many violations of rules through misleading and incorrect advertisements, issued even by AICTE approved institutions. Apparently, no action is being taken to stop the misuse of the approval. Political influence and money power seem to be primarily responsible for this sorry state of affairs. All said and done, the accreditation systems introduced by the AICTE and the UGC, is a welcome move. However, ranking of educational institutions and courses by independent agencies deserve serious consideration. Such ranking system may be likened to the credit rating of financial institutions by independent rating agencies and ISO certification.

    Update

    Of late technical institutions have started advertising in newspapers that they have received ISO - 9002 quality management certification. ISO(International Standards Organisation) – 9000 deals with quality Assurance which is applicable to any type of business, regardless of number of staff, turnover or market sector. It is sub-divided into three separate standards ISO - 9001, ISO - 9002 and ISO - 9003. ISO -9002 is the most widely implemented section which is applicable to all companies involved in production, installation and serving. But where there is no specific design element involved, the relevance of the ISO - 9002 to educational institutions is not clear.

    Quality Ranking: In chapter 8(Recognition, Accreditation and Ranking of Institutions)and Chapter 41(Management) reference has been made to two rankings of Indian business schools, one done jointly by COSMODE (Hyderabad) and Business Today, and the other by Asia Week. COSMODE and Business today has conducted yet another survey ''India's Best B Schools'' The results of the survey have been published in Business Today November 21,200(pp. 79-105). Another ranking has been done by the All India Management Association (AIMA), Business India, and the Delhi-based Management Development Research Agency(MDRA).The result of the AIMA - Business India Survey of Best B-Schools have been published in Business India (September 18-October 1,2000). Update to Chapter 41 (Management) gives a brief account of these two latest rankings.

     
    Web Hyderabad-Jobs.com
    Bangalore-Jobs.org Mumbai-Jobs.org
    • IQRA Society for Career Guidance
    B7-C, View Tower, #6-2-1, Opp. Mercedes Showroom, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad 4.
    Ph: 3326832 Cell: 98490-34125 Fax: 040-3510646.
    © 2002-06 IQRA Society for Career Guidance, All Rights Reserved.
    Domain Registration, Website Design, Website Hosting by HamaraShehar.com