Quality Assurance Through Regulation: Policy, Practice, and Impact

The Role of Administrative Law in U.S. Higher Education Accreditation

Higher education accreditation serves as a key regulatory mechanism in the United States, designed to ensure that institutions meet established standards of academic quality and operational integrity Hall, J. (2012). In the U.S., accreditation is carried out not by the federal government directly but by private accrediting agencies recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). This decentralized model of regulation balances institutional autonomy with public accountability Hall, J. (2012). However, the process is deeply shaped by administrative law, which establishes the legal framework through which agencies are authorized, regulated, and held accountable. Understanding how administrative law affects accreditation is crucial for evaluating its effectiveness in promoting educational quality, especially in states like North Carolina, where higher education institutions play a central role in workforce development and economic growth.

Administrative Law and Its Influence on Higher Education Accreditation Administrative law refers to the legal principles governing the activities of administrative agencies, including rulemaking, enforcement, and adjudication. In the context of higher education, administrative law shapes the policies and operations of accreditation bodies, which serve as gatekeepers for federal financial aid eligibility and institutional legitimacy. According to Hall (2012), the American accreditation system operates in a quasi-market environment, where institutions voluntarily seek approval from recognized agencies to remain competitive and eligible for federal funds. This voluntary model is paradoxically underpinned by strict administrative oversight, especially by the U.S. Department of Education, which mandates that accreditors themselves meet federal guidelines. For example, Wake Forest University must maintain its accreditation to be part of the North Carolina higher education system. 

Administrative law’s influence can be observed in how accrediting bodies must comply with procedural and substantive standards set forth by the Higher Education Act (HEA), reauthorized multiple times since its inception in 1965. These standards include maintaining transparency, using peer review, and enforcing consistent criteria for evaluating institutions. Romanowski (2022) employs Foucault’s concept of governmentality to show that accreditation functions as a form of distant control, allowing federal agencies to influence institutional behavior without direct intervention. This illustrates how administrative law can produce “soft governance” while still holding significant power over institutional autonomy.

One real-world example of administrative law was the revocation of accreditation by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS) in 2016. The U.S. Department of Education terminated its recognition of ACICS due to its failure to uphold basic accountability measures, especially in overseeing for-profit colleges Camera, L. (2016). This decision, grounded in administrative law, had widespread implications: it affected over 200 institutions, disrupted students' financial aid eligibility, and forced many schools to seek new accreditation to survive Camera, L. (2016). 

In North Carolina, administrative law plays a pivotal role in shaping the operational landscape of the University of North Carolina (UNC) system. Public universities must maintain accreditation with agencies such as the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) to receive state funding and maintain legitimacy. Accreditation decisions affect policy implementation, curricular development, and institutional governance. As Barrett, Fernandez, and Gonzalez (2020) note, accreditation serves not only as a quality assurance mechanism but also as a strategic tool for policy alignment, particularly in international contexts. The same is true domestically, where adherence to administrative standards can determine an institution's access to Title IV funding and its reputation among peers.

Administrative law serves as the legal backbone of U.S. higher education accreditation, ensuring that accrediting agencies and institutions are held accountable to public standards of quality and integrity. Through mechanisms such as federal recognition and agency oversight, administrative law exerts substantial influence over institutional behavior while preserving the decentralized character of American higher education. The case of ACICS and its implications in states like North Carolina demonstrate the real-world consequences of regulatory failure and the need for robust legal frameworks in accreditation Camera, L. (2016). Ultimately, administrative law enhances transparency, reinforces regulatory effectiveness, and sustains public trust in higher education—a core priority in public administration.

References:

Barrett, B., Fernandez, F., & Gonzalez, E. M. (2020). Why universities voluntarily pursue US accreditation: The case of Mexico. Higher Education, 79(4), 619–635. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48736220

Hall, J. (2012). Higher-education accreditation: Market regulation or government regulation? The Independent Review, 17(2), 233–238. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/liberty.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/higher-education-accreditation-market-regulation/docview/1095563969/se-2

Camera, L. (2016, September 22). The Education Department strips authority of ACICS, the largest for-profit college accreditor. U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-22/education-department-strips-authority-of-acics-the-largest-for-profit-college-accreditor 

Romanowski, M. H. (2022). Controlling higher education from a distance: Using Foucault’s governmentality to better understand accreditation. Cogent Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2073631