Accreditation Falters Again For AMU
Fri, Nov23, 2007 - Category: University
After fives years operating in Florida, will Ave
Maria University ever be accredited?
The Naples Daily News reported today that, in a meeting earlier this week, the American Academy for Liberal Education (AALE) decided not to grant AMU final full accreditation and, instead, decided to continue AMU's temporary "pre-accredited" status. The article states that "the decision to extend Ave Maria's temporary accreditation was made because of AALE's uncertain status with the federal Department of Education". AveWatch has been closely reporting on the Bush administration's threat to pull recognition of AALE if it did not resolve long-standing performance problems. AALE's interactions with AMU have been questionable, with the most recent controversy centering on AMU's interest in donating to, and rallying donations for, AALE (all while AMU was under final evaluation by AALE, which was a clear conflict of interest). AveWatch even contacted an AALE Board member about the conflict, but was ignored.
It is unclear how the timing of all this will fully impact students at AMU and at AMU's Latin American Campus in Nicaragua (AMULAC); the Nicaraguan campus is riding on AMU's access to federal funds through AALE accreditation. AMU was supposed to be fully accredited or dumped by AALE at this week's meeting; AMU was supposed to have exhausted all of its opportunities to be on temporary pre-accreditation with AALE. This latest pre-accreditation extension was said to be effective "to the end of the academic year", presumably in May. But what then? According to the Naples Daily News "the AALE was organizing a third-party site visit to Ave Maria in the spring to evaluate the school".
"Third-party site visit"?! What does that mean - a group without any connections to AALE? Why would AALE contract a "third-party" to visit and evaluate AMU on AALE's own standards? What kind of authority does such a third-party have? (After all, the federal government gives authority to AALE, not third-parties contracted by AALE, to make accreditation decisions). Who would comprise this third-party? Was a third-party needed because the AALE team that visited AMU earlier in the year had issues, or was it because of all the questionable contact between AMU and AALE over the years?
Another curious matter is the underlying reason for granting temporary rather than permanent accreditation. The NDN article reports that "The decision to extend Ave Maria’s temporary accreditation was made because of AALE’s uncertain status with the federal Department of Education, Martineau [AALE VP] said. The agency has recommended AALE’s recognition as an institutional accreditor be pulled pending the results of a education department advisory committee meeting next month. [...] 'It seems a bit unfair to have these schools go through this whole process and spend all this money when our status is going to be determined,' Martineau said."
This makes no sense. AMU already "went through this whole process" and spent "all this money" anticipating that it would have a final decision on accreditation at this week's AALE Board meeting. Delaying the decision to fully accredit only introduces AMU and AMULAC students to even more instability and uncertainty. Between now and Spring, many parents decide where to send their child to college, and many students decide if they need to transfer to another school. If AALE does squeak past the Department of Education's December review, what parent or student would be confident about attending a school that is still on temporary accreditation and tied to an accrediting agency living day-to-day? If AALE is dropped as an accrediting agency by the Department of Education, AMU and AMULAC stand to lose access to federal funding. Martineau's statement does not inspire confidence that AALE, the most politically conservative of all accrediting agencies, fixed what needed fixing for the Republican Bush administration.
AveWatch was informed that, earlier this week, a complaint was lodged with the federal Department of Education that AALE is intentionally avoiding public input on the schools that it accredits by violating its own stated policy to announce the institutions under review at least 60 days prior to AALE's decision on each school. This violation is clearly seen in the image below, taken from AALE's website today. By failing to list AMU (or any institution) as a school under review for their November board meeting, AALE clearly avoided the reception of any public input on AMU; thus, AALE did not have to weigh such public input in its accreditation decision on AMU. How convenient. AALE proves time and again that it cannot do what it agrees to do.
The Naples Daily News reported today that, in a meeting earlier this week, the American Academy for Liberal Education (AALE) decided not to grant AMU final full accreditation and, instead, decided to continue AMU's temporary "pre-accredited" status. The article states that "the decision to extend Ave Maria's temporary accreditation was made because of AALE's uncertain status with the federal Department of Education". AveWatch has been closely reporting on the Bush administration's threat to pull recognition of AALE if it did not resolve long-standing performance problems. AALE's interactions with AMU have been questionable, with the most recent controversy centering on AMU's interest in donating to, and rallying donations for, AALE (all while AMU was under final evaluation by AALE, which was a clear conflict of interest). AveWatch even contacted an AALE Board member about the conflict, but was ignored.
It is unclear how the timing of all this will fully impact students at AMU and at AMU's Latin American Campus in Nicaragua (AMULAC); the Nicaraguan campus is riding on AMU's access to federal funds through AALE accreditation. AMU was supposed to be fully accredited or dumped by AALE at this week's meeting; AMU was supposed to have exhausted all of its opportunities to be on temporary pre-accreditation with AALE. This latest pre-accreditation extension was said to be effective "to the end of the academic year", presumably in May. But what then? According to the Naples Daily News "the AALE was organizing a third-party site visit to Ave Maria in the spring to evaluate the school".
"Third-party site visit"?! What does that mean - a group without any connections to AALE? Why would AALE contract a "third-party" to visit and evaluate AMU on AALE's own standards? What kind of authority does such a third-party have? (After all, the federal government gives authority to AALE, not third-parties contracted by AALE, to make accreditation decisions). Who would comprise this third-party? Was a third-party needed because the AALE team that visited AMU earlier in the year had issues, or was it because of all the questionable contact between AMU and AALE over the years?
Another curious matter is the underlying reason for granting temporary rather than permanent accreditation. The NDN article reports that "The decision to extend Ave Maria’s temporary accreditation was made because of AALE’s uncertain status with the federal Department of Education, Martineau [AALE VP] said. The agency has recommended AALE’s recognition as an institutional accreditor be pulled pending the results of a education department advisory committee meeting next month. [...] 'It seems a bit unfair to have these schools go through this whole process and spend all this money when our status is going to be determined,' Martineau said."
This makes no sense. AMU already "went through this whole process" and spent "all this money" anticipating that it would have a final decision on accreditation at this week's AALE Board meeting. Delaying the decision to fully accredit only introduces AMU and AMULAC students to even more instability and uncertainty. Between now and Spring, many parents decide where to send their child to college, and many students decide if they need to transfer to another school. If AALE does squeak past the Department of Education's December review, what parent or student would be confident about attending a school that is still on temporary accreditation and tied to an accrediting agency living day-to-day? If AALE is dropped as an accrediting agency by the Department of Education, AMU and AMULAC stand to lose access to federal funding. Martineau's statement does not inspire confidence that AALE, the most politically conservative of all accrediting agencies, fixed what needed fixing for the Republican Bush administration.
AveWatch was informed that, earlier this week, a complaint was lodged with the federal Department of Education that AALE is intentionally avoiding public input on the schools that it accredits by violating its own stated policy to announce the institutions under review at least 60 days prior to AALE's decision on each school. This violation is clearly seen in the image below, taken from AALE's website today. By failing to list AMU (or any institution) as a school under review for their November board meeting, AALE clearly avoided the reception of any public input on AMU; thus, AALE did not have to weigh such public input in its accreditation decision on AMU. How convenient. AALE proves time and again that it cannot do what it agrees to do.
Things are not sunny for Tom Monaghan's academic
institutions. AMU and AMULAC will be in a serious
financial and enrollment crisis if it cannot even
maintain temporary accreditation. AMU has a giant
oratory that will not be open for Christmas mass
because, of all things, the local Catholic bishop
continues to refuse to recognize the structure.
Ave Maria Law School is still under investigation
by the ABA for violations of accreditation, has
multiple lawsuits
to deal with, and just bottomed-out on student
bar
exam passage.