Although accreditation may appear to be a well-designed system on paper, as lead author Andrew Gillen notes for MindingtheCampus, it "accomplishes almost none of what it is supposed to."
mired in secrecy, delivers imprecise and largely unhelpful information, is clouded by possible currents of self-interest, restricts entrepreneurial initiative, is often costly to administer when all costs are considered, and is not sufficiently outcomes based. It does a poor job of conveying important information to those funding it, including the customers themselves (students) as well as major donors (governments, private philanthropists). Its relevance as a quality control and enhancement device is at best marginal.
You can read the Chronicle's article on this report here or you can download the report in its entirety from our website.