SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

Understanding Programme Accreditation Through Faculty Eyes: Benefits, Variations, and Institutional Dynamics

Öğretim Elemanlarının Gözünden Program Akreditasyonu: Yararlar, Farklılıklar ve Kurumsal Dinamikler

Sadegül Akbaba Altun(BAŞKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5690-6088
Rıza Salar(ATATÜRK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6577-0821
Pages
103–119
Publication Date
2026-08-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Academic title was associated with differences in overall perceptions, whereas gender was significant only for the International Benefits sub-dimension.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study explores faculty members’ perceptions of accreditation benefits in higher education, focusing on differences based on programme accreditation status and demographic variables.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Data came from 361 faculty members across state and private universities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Academic title was associated with differences in overall perceptions, whereas gender was significant only for the International Benefits sub-dimension.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Akreditasyon Yararları · Yükseköğretim · Program Akreditasyonu

Abstract

Objective: This study explores faculty members’ perceptions of accreditation benefits in higher education, focusing on differences based on programme accreditation status and demographic variables. Given the increasing prominence of accreditation as a mechanism for promoting educational quality and institutional accountability, it is imperative to understand how faculty members perceive its benefits, particularly across diverse institutional contexts. Methods: The research employed a quantitative survey design, using the Perceptions of Accreditation Benefits Scale, developed and validated by the authors. The scale captures seven dimensions: benefits for students, staff, institutions, inter-institutional relations, disciplines, national frameworks, and internationalization. Data came from 361 faculty members across state and private universities. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the scale’s robust factorial structure, and the authors conducted independent samples t-tests, MANOVA, and three-way ANOVA for statistical analysis. Results: Faculty members from accredited programmes reported significantly higher perceptions of accreditation benefits, particularly in staff development, institutional improvement, and international visibility. Academic title was associated with differences in overall perceptions, whereas gender was significant only for the International Benefits sub-dimension. Among the sub-dimensions, National and Institutional Benefits had the highest item-level means, while Staff Benefits had the lowest. Conclusions and Recommendations: These findings highlight the complex ways faculty experience accreditation across institutional and demographic contexts. The study emphasises the need to involve faculty meaningfully in accreditation processes and to tailor communication strategies to different academic ranks to foster engagement.

Özet

Bu çalışma, yükseköğretimde akreditasyonun faydalarına ilişkin öğretim elemanlarının algılarını, özellikle programın akreditasyon durumuna ve demografik değişkenlere göre farklılıkları inceleyerek araştırmaktadır. Çalışmada, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilip doğrulanan Akreditasyon Faydaları Algı Ölçeği kullanılarak nicel bir araştırma deseni uygulanmıştır. Ölçek; öğrenciler, personel, kurumlar, kurumlar arası ilişkiler, disiplinler, ulusal çerçeveler ve uluslararasılaşma gibi yedi boyuttaki faydaları kapsamaktadır. Veriler, devlet ve vakıf üniversitelerinden 361 öğretim elemanından toplanmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, ölçeğin sağlam faktör yapısını desteklemiştir. Yazarlar, bağımsız örneklem t-testleri, MANOVA ve üç yönlü ANOVA ile istatistiksel analizler gerçekleştirmiştir. Sonuçlar, akredite programlardan gelen öğretim elemanlarının, özellikle personel gelişimi, kurumsal iyileştirme ve uluslararası görünürlük açısından akreditasyon faydalarına ilişkin anlamlı derecede daha yüksek algılara sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Akademik unvan ve cinsiyet de algıları şekillendirmiş; profesörler ve kadın öğretim elemanları daha olumlu tutumlar sergilemiştir. Alt boyutlar arasında kurumsal ve alan-özel faydalar en yüksek puanları alırken, sınırlı uluslararası etkileşim nedeniyle uluslararası faydalar daha az belirgin görünmüştür. Bulgular, öğretim elemanlarının farklı kurumsal ve demografik bağlamlarda akreditasyonu nasıl deneyimlediklerini ve sürece anlamlı katılımlarını sağlamak için farklı akademik unvanlara yönelik iletişim stratejilerinin önemini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Altun, S. A., Salar, R. (2026). Understanding Programme Accreditation Through Faculty Eyes: Benefits, Variations, and Institutional Dynamics. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1789166

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (48)

  1. Acevedo, A., & Rondinel-Oviedo, D. R. (2022). Impact, added value and relevance of an accreditation process on quality assurance in architectural higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 28(2), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1977482
  2. Akbaba-Altun, S., & Bulut, M. (2022). The Benefits of Sectoral Accreditation and Reflections for Educational Organizations. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Perspectives in Higher Education, 7(1), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.32674/j82y4a37
  3. Alkhateeb, H., & Romanowski, M. H. (2021). Identifying administrators’ and faculty’s perspectives regarding CAEP accreditation in a College of Education: A Q methodology research. Studies In Educational Evaluation, 70, 101004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101004
  4. Babbie, E. R. (2020). The practice of social research (15th ed.). Cengage.
  5. Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
  6. Cardoso, S., Rosa, M. J., & Santos, C. S. (2013). Different academics’ characteristics, different perceptions on quality assessment? Quality Assurance in Education, 21(1), 96-117. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881311293089
  7. Cardoso, S., Rosa, M. J., & Stensaker, B. (2015). Why is quality in higher education not achieved? The view of academics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 950. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1052775
  8. Cardoso, S., Rosa, M. J., & Videira, P. (2018). Academics’ participation in quality assurance: Does it reflect ownership? Quality in Higher Education, 24(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2018.1433113
  9. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE
  10. de Paor, C. (2016). The contribution of professional accreditation to quality assurance in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 22(3), 228. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2016.1263925
  11. Dodd, A. H. (2004). Accreditation as a catalyst for institutional effectiveness. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2004(123), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.116
  12. Dottin, P. C. (2021). Institutional accreditation of online institutions in the Anglophone Caribbean: Synergies and misalignments. Quality in Higher Education, 27(3), 357. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1935277
  13. Duarte, N., & Vardasca, R. (2023). Literature review of accreditation systems in higher education. Education Sciences, 13(6), 582. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13060582
  14. Ewell, P. T. (2010). Twenty years of quality assurance in higher education: What’s happened and what’s different? Quality in Higher Education, 16(2), 173. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2010.485728
  15. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.
  16. Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2014). Survey research methods (5th ed.). SAGE.
  17. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
  18. Graffin, S. D., & Ward, A. J. (2010). Certifications and reputation: Determining the standard of desirability amidst uncertainty. Organization Science, 21(2), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0400
  19. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
  20. Harvey, L. (2004). The power of accreditation: views of academics. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(2), 207-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080042000218267
  21. Harvey, L., & Newton, J. (2004). Transforming quality evaluation. Quality in Higher Education, 10(2), 149. https://doi.org/10.1080/1353832042000230635
  22. Hegji, A. (2017). An Overview of Accreditation of Higher Education in the United States. CRS Report R43826, Version 7. Congressional Research Service.
  23. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based SEM. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
  24. Hurley, A. E., Scandura, T. A., Schriesheim, C. A., Brannick, M. T., Seers, A., Vandenberg, R. J., & Williams, L. J. (1997). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Guidelines, issues, and alternatives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(6), 667–683. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199711)18:6 3.0.CO;2-T
  25. Kleijnen, J., Dolmans, D., Willems, J., & van Hout, H. (2011). Does internal quality management contribute to more control or to improvement of higher education? A survey on faculty’s perceptions. Quality Assurance in Education, 19(2), 141-155.
  26. Kumar, P., Shukla, B., & Passey, D. (2020). Impact of accreditation on quality and excellence of higher education institutions. Revista Investigacion Operacional, 41(2), 151-167.
  27. Long, K. A. (2018). Battle of the brand: Independent “American” universities abroad. International Higher Education, 95, 4-5. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2018.95.10716
  28. Mady, M. T., Alhussainan, A. A., & Mady, T. (2023). AACSB-accreditation benefits as predictor of faculty attitude toward the accreditation process: an exploratory study. Journal of Management and Business Education, 6(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.35564/jmbe.2023.0002
  29. Makhoul, S. A. (2019). Higher education accreditation, quality assurance and their impact to teaching and learning enhancement. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 35(4), 235. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeas-08-2018-0092
  30. McGuire, P. (2009). Accreditation’s benefits for individuals and institutions. New Directions for Higher Education, 145, 29-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.332
  31. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
  32. Mussawy, S. A. J., & Rossman, G. B. (2018). Quality assurance and accreditation in Afghanistan: Faculty members’ perceptions from selected universities. Higher Learning Research Communications, 8(2), 9-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v8i2.411
  33. Newton, J. (2000). Feeding the beast or improving quality?: Academics’ perceptions of quality assurance and quality monitoring. Quality in Higher Education, 6(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.1080/713692740
  34. Newton, J. (2002). Views from below: Academics coping with quality. Quality in Higher Education, 8(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320220127434
  35. Paor, C. de. (2016). The contribution of professional accreditation to quality assurance in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 22(3), 228. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2016.1263925
  36. Patil, A. R., & Codner, G. P. (2007). Accreditation of engineering education: review, observations and proposal for global accreditation. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32(6), 639. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790701520594
  37. Romanowski, M. H. (2021). The idolatry of accreditation in higher education: enhancing our understanding. Quality in Higher Education, 28(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1948460
  38. Romanowski, M. H. (2022). Internationalization and CAEP accreditation: replicating US teacher education programs abroad. Teaching Education, 33(4), 404. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2021.1948991
  39. Ryan, T. (2015). Quality assurance in higher education: A review of literature. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v5i4.257
  40. Salto, D. J. (2021). Beyond national regulation in higher education? Revisiting regulation and understanding organisational responses to foreign accreditation of management education programmes. Quality in Higher Education, 27(2), 206. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2020.1833420
  41. Sánchez-Chaparro, T., Rémaud, B., Gómez-Frías, V., Duykaerts, C., & Jolly-Desodt, A.-M. (2021). Benefits and challenges of cross-border quality assurance in higher education. A case study in engineering education in Europe. Quality in Higher Education, 28(3), 308. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.2004984
  42. Staub, D. F. (2019). ‘Another accreditation? what’s the point?’ effective planning and implementation for specialised accreditation. Quality in Higher Education, 25(2), 171. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2019.1634342
  43. Stensaker, B., Langfeldt, L., Harvey, L., Huisman, J., & Westerheijden, D. F. (2010). An in depth study on the impact of external quality assurance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(4), 465. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903432074
  44. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
  45. Teelken, C. (2011). Compliance or pragmatism: how do academics deal with managerialism in higher education? A comparative study in three countries. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 271. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.511171
  46. Trullén, J., & Rodríguez, S. F. (2011). Faculty perceptions of instrumental and improvement reasons behind quality assessments in higher education: the roles of participation and identification. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 678. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.590587
  47. Watty, K. (2006). Want to Know About Quality in Higher Education? Ask an Academic. Quality in Higher Education, 12(3), 291. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320601051101
  48. Zavale, N. C. (2021). Challenges of accreditation in an African university: reflections from the Eduardo Mondlane University, in Mozambique. Quality in Higher Education, 28(2), 236. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.2010987