EIRP Proceedings, Vol 10 (2015)

Abstract

All universities are not equal. Universities are not equal in size, scope, curricular offerings, and resources. More importantly, they are not equal in mission, scale of operation, productivity, and quality. Even two universities located within the same geographical locations may differ considerably in productivity and quality let alone those that are located a world apart. Given the wide range of differences in the environments of these institutions, in the political systems within which they reside, in the economic contexts within which they operate, and in their historical origins, the variations among higher education institutions are understandable and frankly speaking should be anticipated. Given the differences among institutions, how should we approach the issue of their quality? In response to this question, the benefits and process of rankings are compared to that of accreditation. The implications of rankings and accreditation for two “randomly” selected institutions in the US are discussed. By reviewing the standards used by two accrediting commissions, a set of principles that is applicable universally is recommended.