Is Journalism Education Losing Its Edge? The Debate Over Accreditation
"Navigating the accreditation maze in journalism: What does it mean for the future of media professionals and are standards slipping?"
In the rapidly evolving landscape of media, the education of future journalists is under intense scrutiny. Discussions around voluntary program accreditation in higher education aren't typically exciting, but in the spring of 2017, Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications announced it would no longer seek accreditation from the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC). This decision sparked a significant debate about the relevance and effectiveness of current accreditation standards.
Medill's move wasn't an isolated incident. The University of California-Berkeley also recently announced it was letting its accreditation lapse. Berkeley dean Edward Wasserman supported accreditation for undergraduate programs but found the process unsuitable for his school's graduate program (Fain, 2017). These decisions raise critical questions: Are accreditation standards keeping pace with the industry's demands, or are they stifling innovation and adaptability?
The debate isn't just confined to a few institutions. Journalism educators worldwide closely monitor ACEJMC's developments because the organization has been a model for accreditation bodies in other countries. Additionally, eight institutions outside the United States are accredited by ACEJMC. That international expansion has caused the membership of ACEJMC to be stable. This has sparked an important question of whether journalism programs are truly ensuring quality, or merely adhering to compliance?
The Core Debate: Quality vs. Compliance in Journalism Programs
Accreditation is a topic that is sure to spark lively debates among faculty of journalism programs. Several prominent journalism programs in the United States recently let their accreditation status lapse from the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC)—leading to renewed public debate about requirements and what it means to receive approval every six years. Journalism educators around the world are closely following the developments of ACEJMC because the organization has been used as a model for accreditation bodies in other countries.
- Rigidity vs. Innovation: Some argue that ACEJMC's standards are too rigid, preventing programs from adapting quickly to changes in the industry.
- Resource Intensive: The accreditation process can be expensive and time-consuming, putting a strain on smaller programs with limited resources.
- Focus on Inputs vs. Outputs: Critics suggest ACEJMC focuses too much on “inputs” like faculty credentials and curriculum, and not enough on “outputs” like student learning and career readiness.
The Future of Journalism Education: Adapting to Change
The debate over accreditation reflects a larger challenge facing journalism education: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing industry while maintaining core values and standards. As technology evolves and new media platforms emerge, journalism programs must adapt their curriculum, teaching methods, and assessment strategies. Whether accreditation is part of the solution remains an open question, but it's clear that a commitment to innovation, collaboration, and continuous improvement is essential for the future of journalism education. Embracing change while upholding quality will be critical for shaping the next generation of media professionals.