Effectiveness plans and practices in programmatic accreditation: differences in evaluative culture in nursing and engineering

Abstract

One of the main methods of public accountability in higher education is the use of accreditation to measure quality and ensure continuous improvement. In recent decades, accrediting bodies have moved away from inputs-driven requirements to requirements that focus on outcomes. One of the major shifts has been towards requiring institutions and programs to report on their effectiveness. However, despite the significant commitment of resources towards accreditation, there is little research around the practices within accredited programs. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to better understand the practices of practitioners of program effectiveness in accredited programs of engineering and nursing at two separate institutions of higher education. The study found significant differences in the scope of effectiveness practice between the two disciplines, with engineering practitioners focusing primarily on the assessment of student outcomes while nursing practitioners focused on systems that comprehensively evaluated many different aspects of their program. The study further found that most of the practitioners had come to their positions as novices; this presented an opportunity to learn from these seasoned professionals and theorize best practices for the field that may contribute to improved effectiveness practices for programs that are programmatically accredited. Suggestions are also provided for the field of accreditation more broadly to help clarify terminology and expectations.