I thought it might be useful to write a brief reminder about these "facts of accreditation", from my perpective:
- These professional accreditations (i.e. AACSB, AMBA, EQUIS, etc.) might have their added value, in my opinion, too. However, I do not filter out (or filter in) any school depending solely on the existence or lack of this. Because;
- These are voluntary choices for schools, I mean, schools may simply opt out and still be offering quality education. I can admit that these voluntary accreditations can indicate a mark of quality, but the reverse is not necessarily true i.e. Lack of professional accreditation does not necessarily indicate a lack or shortcoming of quality. For example, there are business schools without any professional accreditation which perform higher in some rankings than some of the professionally accredited ones (see the QS Business School report, Eduniversal, for example).
- They have nothing to do with the official validity or recognition of the degree.
- Their degree of importance depends on the context: the country the school operates in, the profile and the goals of the canditate, etc. For example when I look at UK business schools -and unis, in a broader sense- a positive QAA report seems more important, since this is the reference used for the evaluation of official recognition of the HEI in the UK.
In a nutshell, again, Bogazici is a perfect example of a top school with no professional accreditation in this sense. I do not think even one candidate here would go for any other option just considering this accreditation. (Among those who have heard about these!)
I thought it might be useful to write a brief reminder about these "facts of accreditation", from my perpective:
- These professional accreditations (i.e. AACSB, AMBA, EQUIS, etc.) might have their added value, in my opinion, too. However, I do not filter out (or filter in) any school depending solely on the existence or lack of this. Because;
- These are voluntary choices for schools, I mean, schools may simply opt out and still be offering quality education. I can admit that these voluntary accreditations can indicate a mark of quality, but the reverse is not necessarily true i.e. Lack of professional accreditation does not necessarily indicate a lack or shortcoming of quality. For example, there are business schools without any professional accreditation which perform higher in some rankings than some of the professionally accredited ones (see the QS Business School report, Eduniversal, for example).
- They have nothing to do with the official validity or recognition of the degree.
- Their degree of importance depends on the context: the country the school operates in, the profile and the goals of the canditate, etc. For example when I look at UK business schools -and unis, in a broader sense- a positive QAA report seems more important, since this is the reference used for the evaluation of official recognition of the HEI in the UK.
In a nutshell, again, Bogazici is a perfect example of a top school with no professional accreditation in this sense. I do not think even one candidate here would go for any other option just considering this accreditation. (Among those who have heard about these!)
