 "Photo: Nicollete McClendon")
Accreditation. At Howard University, this ominous term strikes a nerve within the student body - a menacing intimidation from the United States Department of Education. Accreditation is the difference between receiving a hard-earned degree, as opposed to a random piece of paper signifying that the last four (or five in some cases) years of your life haven’t been in vain.
The registration issues, the financial aid rejection, the rest of the stressors Howard so graciously bestows on all its students at one time or another, you’ve endured them all for a purpose - recognition of the education that qualifies you as a candidate for higher learning, or most importantly getting a job.
This week, Howard University will be judged by anonymous arbitrators on its legitimacy as a university on a number of different criterion. After the critique, Howard will be pronounced as either an accredited university, or in the worse case scenario, a non-accredited university.
In the chance the latter occurs, students hoping to attend Howard University in the future will undoubtedly go elsewhere, and although the credits we’ve slaved for during our time at this lovely institution wouldn’t be null and void, it wouldn’t look too good to employers to see we’ve earned a degree from a university that recently lost its accreditation.
According to the United States Department of Education, the purpose of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meets acceptable levels of quality. The federal government itself doesn’t judge institutions for accreditation but does publish a list of nationally recognized agencies that they deem reliable sources of doing so.
Well if any of these government-approved agencies take a random tour of Howard’s campus and find the learning atmosphere or environment unfit, or decide that we don’t meet their standards, then what? Do we all have to just throw up our hands and transfer to new schools? Go home? Move to Hollywood and become aspiring actresses and models?
No, it’s not that simple.
Any university that doesn’t meet the criterion for accreditation is given a certain amount of time to correct any issues that may have held them back, say deplorable classroom conditions or under qualified professors. Also, students who were attending the university while it was still accredited would be in the clear. But for students who anticipate beginning their college careers after a university-wide loss of accreditation - not so much.
Hopefully, Howard University will come out of this accreditation battle victorious and be in the clear for another 10, blissful years.
7 comments
You noted that most many "recruiters" state that resumes coming Howard University "usually go to the bottom of the stack (or the "round" file... trash bin). My question to you, if you're aware of this implicit racist HR practice I would like to know what have you done to alleviate this problem? Also, when you state that "most people outside of Howard already think they've lost their accreditation", thereby, are you specifically referring to Whites, Blacks, Asian, or Latinos within the HR field? In your opinion, what can be done to reverse the distorted and negatively skewed thinking for those operating within the HR field as it pertains to Howard University current students and graduates?Last, do you think if Howard University was not having the "accreditation" or shall I say a "credibility" problem, do you think perosnnel within the HR field would still have the same viewpoint of Howard University?
My exact sentiments...couldn't have said it any better myself.
Further, if the personnel the Middle States Commission on Higher Education team actually visited the any of the academic buildings(i.e., unannounced that is), they would be really shocked as to what they would see in the form of "managed chaos" from an operational perspective(i.e., deshelved classrooms, non-functioning water fountains, non-functional SMART rooms, etc...).From a pure security standpoint alone, based upon all of the students who have been robbed, assaulted, raped, shot, and harrassed[by students and non-students alike] on campus and not including the "dangezone" like issues from the various parking lots. For those who may dissent, I would like for them to ask any female student how safe do they feel walking out to the parking lots when the sunsets. As a result, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education team should issue an injunction that requires Howard University to immeidately install state of the art surveillance cameras covering all parking lots, the library, and any other university property that will be monitored by "trained" personnel. In order to cover such costs, Howard University can defray such costs by redirecting the monies earmarked for the yearly buffonnery Homecoming activities.Finally, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education team should actually spend time talking to students who are not part of the "Howard University" mouthpieces(i.e., most of the student leaders who maintain the status-quo even though they know such problems exists) in an effort to hear the "Realities" of Howard University to have an intellectually honest framework of Howard University. In sum, until such changes occur, Howard University will be "reaccredited" and the status quo will continue while all of the students will suffer because a "few" so-called University Administrator's are more conccerned about continuing a "myth" while fattening their wallets/purses at the expense of those whom for which they serve, the Howard University students.
P.S. It is my hope the the Middle States Commission on Higher Education team would venture over to the "cold war" like language lab, the chemistry buildings with the archaic equipment and the engineering building, etc....