GUEST COLUMN
Multiple Missions of Arts Accreditation By Samuel Hope
W
hat does “being accredited� mean, especially for arts programs at the collegiate level? The answer is complex because accreditation has multiple missions. Institutions and programs also have multiple missions. Therefore, each relationship between accreditation and an institution or program is somewhat unique. Being accredited is similar to holding a baccalaureate. All baccalaureates have commonalities, but each is different depending on discipline, institution, and even personal choices about elective courses. The specific meaning of the baccalaureate to individual holders is even more diverse, and virtually impossible to codify. Like so much else in academe and in life, accreditation means working productively with the relationship between what is held in common and what is unique, both institutionally and individually. Therefore, being accredited means meeting standards, but not in ways that produce standardization. Multiple missions are respected and supported. This principle underlies the timetested American approach to accreditation. Given the natures of the arts disciplines, it is a crucially important basis for accreditation in art and design, dance, music, and theatre. Accreditation in the arts began in the United States in 1924. In that year, the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) was formed by a small group of institutions. Among their purposes was agreement on certain commonalities with regard to professional preparation. For example, what, in general, should the Bachelor of Music degree mean in American higher education? What should the common national standards for this and other credentials be? And, how can professional and public assurance be provided that accredited institutions offering a degree are meeting the common standards? From the beginning, principles respecting institutional independence were in evidence as such questions were answered, and indeed, many safeguards were built into
62
standards-setting and review systems. NASM balanced standards and independence, and thus was successful. Twenty years later, the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD) was formed for similar purposes. Theatre (NAST) followed in 1965, and dance (NASD), in 1980. Today, these associations together have over 1100 member schools and departments. Their standards and procedures cover a broad range of degrees and specializations, are respected both nationally and internationally, and continue to make many important contributions to the strong development of the arts in American higher education. What does all this mean for the various constituents of the arts programs at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln? One of the best ways to start answering is to think about participation. Institutions volunteer to participate in arts accreditation for several primary reasons. They want to be involved in setting the commonly accepted academic standards of a field. They want to be reviewed externally in light of those standards and have public recognition that they are meeting the standards appropriate to the content and levels of programs they offer. They want to work for improvement both locally and nationally. Being accredited means all of these things. Participation is an element of field-wide citizenship with many local benefits. Institutional participation means engagement in five areas that accreditation encompasses in interrelationship: expertise, consensus-based standards, self-evaluation, peer review, and public information. An underlying premise of accreditation is that expertise in the content of what is being reviewed is essential for making valid, helpful decisions about educational achievement and the conditions necessary for it. Expertise in the amount needed can come only if personnel affiliated with arts programs in higher education volunteer in significant numbers. The development of consensusbased standards obviously requires institutional expertise and participation, as do self-
evaluation, peer review, and public information. Expertise is essential also because institutions and programs being reviewed have different missions and ways of working. Disciplines and specializations have different habits of mind, processes, and evaluation systems. Given all the possibilities and variables, especially in creative fields such as the arts, only expertise can provide the basis for effective judgment at the highest levels of practice. Institutions with arts programs accredited by NASAD, NASD, NASM, or NAST apply local expertise to do several things every time they are reviewed, usually every ten years. One is to conduct a self-study, a process that results in a document. Selfstudy addresses continuing fulfillment of national standards established and amended by vote of the appropriate association membership. In established institutions, however, the self-study normally focuses most on improvement. In fact, for most arts schools and departments the self-study is a major planning event, a time to analyze, evaluate, develop aspirations, and create specific goals for advancement. Self-study engages faculty, students, and administrators most directly, but alumni and other constituencies are also involved. Self-study brings people together to shape the future of a program, to make it better constantly. The result is unique to each institution. How do visitors and commissioners work with the standards and all these institutional differences in ways that do not produce standardization? For one thing, accreditation standards constitute a framework of common expectations. They are not detailed blueprints. They leave means to the institution as much as possible. This is consistent with the way that almost all requirements work in a free society. Laws about driving create a framework for all to follow, but they do not stipulate what kind or color of car one must drive. Most details are left to the driver. Another aspect is that standards are applied in light of the mission and goals set by the institution. To oversimplify for exam-
University of Nebraska–Lincoln