Part 2 of our conversation with Dr. Robert Manzer on EdUp Accreditation Insights picked up where we left off, and quickly moved into even deeper waters.
Here, Dr. Manzer sharpened his critique of the “continuous improvement” model that dominates accreditation today. Borrowed from business in the 1990s, this Total Quality Management framework was never a good fit for academia, and faculty know it. Too often, departments are asked to manufacture “closing the loop” stories rather than engage in authentic improvement.
What struck me most in this episode was his insistence that academic excellence must remain the center of accreditation. Job outcomes and employability matter, of course, but if we reduce higher education to workforce training alone, we miss its core mission: to awaken students intellectually and prepare them to think critically. Academic excellence should lead to employable graduates, but skipping straight to job metrics risks losing what makes universities unique.
We also explored the future of accreditors themselves. With new players entering the field—some designed for specific institution types like public universities—there’s a chance to move away from one-size-fits-all standards. If done well, this could create a system where institutions choose accreditors based on their commitment to quality, not just convenience. The risk, of course, is the opposite: that institutions flock to the “easiest” path.
For me, Part 2 underscored the urgency of the moment. Accreditation is at a crossroads, and so is faculty governance. If accreditors embrace their role as guardians of quality and partners in governance, they could become the linchpin of a renewed system of higher education. If not, we may see even more erosion of trust and effectiveness.