Hi, I am just wondering if these accreditations mean anything - not on the superficial level, but on the practical level. To my mind, schools can just get away from the inspection by preparing tons of purely formal documents and concealing a mess. So, what they see seems far cry from a real picture of schools.
What would you say? Are CIS/WASC accredited schools really good?
CIS/WASC Accredited Schools - Are they really good?
-
inspiration
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:52 am
-
interteach
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 2:25 pm
Well, I do know from the experience of going through a joint CIS/NEASC accreditation, that there are some things that are non-negotiable for getting accredited. The school I was at was given an additional 18 months because the admin didn't meet the minimum requirements for their part of the accreditation process. So, on some level, accreditation speaks to the school.
On the other hand, accreditation works to best suit the students. Often times, teacher needs are overlooked. I agree with the prior post that you have to look at each school for it's own merits. Accreditation means the school met minimum requirements in self-study, not that they have achieved an ideal. Some schools are great at the time of accreditation and then during the 5-10 yr interim forget the ideals they established during self-study.
Don't rely on CIS accreditation alone. They are not as stringent as the U.S. regional accrediting agencies. Much of where CIS gets it's money for it's non-profit status is from the schools that pay to recruit teachers. CIS supports the schools.
On the other hand, accreditation works to best suit the students. Often times, teacher needs are overlooked. I agree with the prior post that you have to look at each school for it's own merits. Accreditation means the school met minimum requirements in self-study, not that they have achieved an ideal. Some schools are great at the time of accreditation and then during the 5-10 yr interim forget the ideals they established during self-study.
Don't rely on CIS accreditation alone. They are not as stringent as the U.S. regional accrediting agencies. Much of where CIS gets it's money for it's non-profit status is from the schools that pay to recruit teachers. CIS supports the schools.
-
inspiration
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:52 am
CIS posts its accreditation fees on the website. [url]http://www.cois.org/page.cfm?p=237[/url]
It looks like a huge expense for a school to get accredited, considering all fees and costs. Plus, there is an 'Annual Fee' as well even after a school is accredited.
Is it worth that much in view of the posts above?
It looks like a huge expense for a school to get accredited, considering all fees and costs. Plus, there is an 'Annual Fee' as well even after a school is accredited.
Is it worth that much in view of the posts above?
As a teacher, it is more beneficial for you to be working at an accredited school. As you move around, there are some jobs that when hiring you will only give you teaching-year credits if the teaching was at an accredited institution. Not every place does this, but it may affect some teachers.
Also, while the accrediting process is not perfect, it does force a school to look at itself with the self-study. Schools may "lie to themselves" afterwards, but I do think it is a good mechanism to lead to school improvement, even at some of the less than reputable institutions.
Also, while the accrediting process is not perfect, it does force a school to look at itself with the self-study. Schools may "lie to themselves" afterwards, but I do think it is a good mechanism to lead to school improvement, even at some of the less than reputable institutions.