Today, WASC announced it would become a national accreditor. As a leader on student outcomes, equity, and transparency, it would be a welcome change if there was demand among colleges for a higher bar of quality. I worry it will have the opposite effect 1/ insidehighered.com/news/2020/02/2…
The change today is made possible by new @usedgov regulations that eliminate the distinction between regional and national agencies. It's rational was that this would encourage competition, foster innovation, and *increase* accountability 2/
In comments, we argued competition in assuring quality is never a good thing and will result in a race to the bottom. We've seen it before. When for-profit colleges got in trouble with their accrediting agency, they simply sought a new one 3/ regulations.gov/document?D=ED-…
In this case, it was ACICS, who repeatedly honored colleges facing legal challenges, set weak standards for student outcomes, and enabled the worst actors that preyed on students. We could see much more of that in the future 4/
WASC's change alone is not concerning. But to the extent other regionals follow suit and it results in market competition, the best way to attract colleges is by weakening standards, a potential outcome even @usedgov said was possible. 5/
But the new regulations make a number of other concerning changes, encouraging standards that get institutions through the door in a way that is fast, flexible, easy, and cheap. That in combination with competition is a recipe for disaster. 6/ americanprogress.org/issues/educati…
It prioritizes institutions as the customers, not students, not accountability, and not quality. Maybe fast, cheap, and easy works for fast food, but not for assuring quality with $120 billion at stake in a sector that has repeatedly failed in protecting against the worst actors
