A surreal illustration representing the journey and costs of journalism accreditation.

Is Your Journalism Program Worth the Accreditation Price? What Directors Really Think

"Decoding Accreditation: A Deep Dive into Journalism Program Evaluations"


Accreditation is often a hot topic among journalism program faculty, sparking heated debates about its worth and impact. For years, numerous prominent journalism programs in the United States have questioned its value, leading to renewed discussion about its requirements and the true meaning of seeking approval every six years. With developments in ACEJMC(Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications ) closely monitored worldwide, this accreditation has been used as a model for many accreditation bodies in other countries. Understanding the sentiments of journalism program directors is key to understanding the future of journalism accreditation.

Discussions surrounding voluntary program accreditation in higher education aren't usually known for excitement; however, the topic took a dramatic turn in the spring of 2017 when Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications announced it would no longer pursue accreditation from the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC).

Medill is not the first prominent program in the United States to forgo ACEJMC accreditation. The University of California-Berkeley also recently announced that it was letting its accreditation lapse. Berkeley dean Edward Wasserman said he generally supported accreditation for undergraduate programs, but that the process was not a good fit for his school's boutique graduate student-only program (Fain 2017). This decision reflects a broader scrutiny of accreditation processes and their relevance in today's fast-paced media environment.

AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

The Selective Reach of ACEJMC Accreditation

ACEJMC accreditation remains a selective credential, held by only about 120 programs worldwide. Indiana University's journalism program, for example, has been accredited by ACEJMC—an agency recognized by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation—since 1948. Proponents of accreditation say it attests to a school's academic quality and rigor, adherence to the accrediting body's standards and policies, and overall educational climate.

Debated Standards, Conflicting Director Views

The value of journalism accreditation standards for undergraduate programs has been studied and is still debated, with surveys of program directors capturing the reasons programs choose to be accredited or not. Administrators at both ACEJMC-accredited and non-accredited HBCU programs have directly critiqued the standards. The standards also reach into practical questions prospective students ask, such as what governs practicum and clinical placement and whether minimum GPAs or standardized test scores are required.

Two Meanings of 'Accreditation'

Historically, 'accreditation' has meant very different things for individual journalists and for journalism programs. In the United States there is no formal accreditation process for individual news professionals; journalists instead obtain credentials of sorts by belonging to professional associations such as the National Association of Science Writers, which may help them enter press rooms or access embargoed information. At the program level, journalism schools pursue accreditation from bodies like ACEJMC, the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications. The term carries a third meaning abroad, where government authorities control journalist accreditation—Human Rights Watch, for example, has described Kazakhstan's repeated denial of accreditation to Radio Azattyq journalists as part of a broader pattern of administrative harassment aimed at curtailing independent media.

The Core Debate: Quality vs. Compliance

A surreal illustration representing the journey and costs of journalism accreditation.

The central question surrounding ACEJMC accreditation is whether it truly enhances the quality of journalism education or simply enforces compliance with a set of standardized requirements. Concerns have been raised that focusing on accreditation diverts resources from program innovation and responsiveness to the evolving media landscape. Additionally, the high cost of accreditation can be a barrier for smaller programs, limiting their ability to compete with larger, better-funded institutions.

Several journalism program directors have voiced concerns about accreditation, indicating that adhering to set standards conflicts with the innovation necessary in the contemporary media landscape (Fain 2017). Some worry that the accreditation process focuses too much on 'inputs,' such as faculty salaries and facilities, rather than 'outputs,' like student learning and career readiness (Warren 2017b). This concern raises questions about the true value of accreditation in preparing students for the demands of the modern media industry.

Key Challenges with ACEJMC Accreditation:
  • High Costs: Accreditation fees, site visit expenses, and faculty time commitment.
  • Limited Flexibility: Restrictions on curriculum design and course offerings.
  • Focus on Inputs: Emphasis on resources rather than student outcomes.
  • Barriers for Small Programs: Difficulties in meeting standards with limited resources.
AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

Three Decades of Accredited-vs-Unaccredited Comparisons

Three decades of research have compared accredited and unaccredited journalism and mass communication programs, yet on both sides of the Atlantic the accreditation of journalism schools has proved a vexed question, with doubts raised about the benefit of obtaining such external endorsement. Researchers have separately asked whether employers actually value accreditation, a theme captured in work framed as 'chasing the accreditation dream.' Industry research has also begun examining how the public views journalism and press regulation, extending the debate beyond the schools themselves.

When Accreditation Hinders More Than It Helps

Critics argue that accreditation can be a hindrance rather than a help: at one journalism school, accreditation meant telling students they could not take all the classes they wanted, and the standard criticism is that such programs have diminished professional journalism education in favor of the more academic pursuit of communication studies. Enforcement actions also expose the limits of the system. When UNC's journalism school denied tenure to Nikole Hannah-Jones, the accrediting council placed the school on provisional accreditation status; it will be re-evaluated in two years, and if it does not meet the agency's diversity standard, it will lose its accredited status.

U.S. Program Reviews vs. U.K. Professional Accreditation

Comparative guides help prospective students weigh journalism programs side by side, comparing factors such as accreditation status, tuition costs, best majors to pursue, and average salaries in journalism-related professions. In the U.K., the comparison is shaped by professional accreditations such as NCTJ and BJTC, where completing an accredited degree may offer exemptions from professional qualifications. Accredited online journalism degrees are also positioned as a route for working professionals, with cost comparisons framed as a key part of choosing a program.

Despite these concerns, many journalism programs continue to seek and maintain ACEJMC accreditation. They view it as a mark of quality that enhances their reputation and attracts students. Accreditation can also provide a framework for continuous improvement and ensure that programs meet industry standards. However, the debate over the value of accreditation is likely to continue as the media landscape evolves and journalism programs adapt to new challenges.

The Future of Journalism Education Accreditation

The future of journalism education accreditation hinges on addressing the concerns of program directors and adapting to the changing media landscape. ACEJMC must consider ways to reduce costs, increase flexibility, and focus on student outcomes. It must also ensure that accreditation remains a valuable tool for improving journalism education, not simply a barrier to entry for smaller programs. As the debate continues, the goal should be to create an accreditation process that truly enhances the quality of journalism education and prepares students for success in the digital age.

AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

Quality or Compliance? The Core Question

Across the literature, the core question about ACEJMC accreditation is whether it signals quality or simply enforces compliance—a review of the accrediting council's role is framed precisely as 'Accreditation: Quality or Compliance.' Surveys of program directors show the value of journalism accreditation standards for undergraduate programs is still debated, with directors offering reasons both for being accredited and for not being accredited. This tension between external endorsement and actual educational value sits at the center of the accreditation-price discussion.

Accreditation's Next Frontier: Emerging Roles

Looking ahead, accreditation bodies face the question of who they cover. The Journalist Accreditation Board currently focuses mainly on traditional journalists and does not actively regulate or engage professionals in strategic communications roles, leaving a growing segment of the field outside its reach. Industry-facing programs, meanwhile, increasingly tout their education and industry partnerships and accreditations—broadcast journalism degrees such as the University of Salford's BA (Hons) Journalism (Broadcast), based at MediaCity, market these ties directly to applicants. Career guidance for aspiring U.S. journalists similarly emphasizes education options, key skills, networking, and job search strategies alongside formal study.

Ripple Effects of Accreditation Decisions

Losing accreditation carries consequences far beyond a designation. When the accrediting agency downgraded UNC's Hussman School, observers warned it could pose major challenges to the school's ability to attract students and hire and retain faculty, as well as severely harm its respectability. Accreditation also creates friction in the credit-transfer system: students moving from nationally accredited to regionally accredited journalism programs often encounter credit acceptance challenges, forcing them to retake courses or extend their study duration, adding time and cost to degree completion.

What 'Adequate Preparation' Means on the Ground

A case study of journalism education in the Mountain West addresses a void in scholarship by exploring what constitutes adequate preparation in a local context, drawing on the perceptions of journalism students and educators at a public university as well as journalism practitioners in the nearby media market. Journalism educators themselves note that the spread of career ambition among students is very broad. Research on the impact of accreditation on recruitment and employment reflects this human dimension, showing how closely program credentials are tied to students' career prospects.

About this Article -

Written with AI assistance from published research, and reviewed by the Mystum team. See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1080/1461670x.2018.1526641, Alternate LINK

Title: Accrediting Council On Education In Journalism And Mass Communications Accreditation: Quality Or Compliance?

Subject: Communication

Journal: Journalism Studies

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Authors: Robin Blom, Brian J. Bowe, Lucinda D. Davenport

Published: 2018-10-10

Everything You Need To Know

1

What are the perceived benefits and drawbacks of ACEJMC accreditation for journalism programs, and what is the core debate surrounding its value?

ACEJMC accreditation is viewed by some as a hallmark of quality, enhancing a program's reputation and attracting students. It can also provide a framework for continuous improvement, ensuring programs meet industry standards. However, concerns exist regarding the high costs, limited flexibility, and focus on resources rather than student outcomes. The key debate is whether it truly enhances the quality of journalism education or simply enforces compliance with standardized requirements. This leads to resources being diverted from program innovation.

2

Why do some journalism program directors express concerns about ACEJMC accreditation, particularly regarding innovation and student preparedness?

Several journalism program directors have voiced concerns that adhering to set standards conflicts with the innovation necessary in the contemporary media landscape. The accreditation process is perceived by some as focusing too much on 'inputs,' such as faculty salaries and facilities, rather than 'outputs,' like student learning and career readiness. These concerns raise questions about the true value of ACEJMC accreditation in adequately preparing students for the demands of the modern media industry.

3

What is the primary debate surrounding ACEJMC accreditation, and how does it affect smaller journalism programs with limited resources?

The central question surrounding ACEJMC accreditation revolves around whether it genuinely enhances the quality of journalism education or merely enforces compliance with a standardized set of requirements. Concerns have been raised that focusing on ACEJMC accreditation may divert resources from program innovation and responsiveness to the evolving media landscape. The high cost of accreditation can also create a barrier for smaller programs, limiting their ability to compete with larger, better-funded institutions. These financial implications can impact a program's ability to invest in cutting-edge technology, faculty development, and student resources.

4

How can ACEJMC adapt to better serve journalism programs and ensure accreditation remains valuable in the evolving media landscape?

The future hinges on ACEJMC addressing concerns of program directors and adapting to the evolving media landscape. ACEJMC must consider reducing costs, increasing flexibility, and focusing on student outcomes. It must also ensure accreditation is a valuable tool for improving journalism education, not a barrier to entry for smaller programs. This includes reassessing the evaluation metrics to place greater emphasis on student work, career placement rates, and alumni success.

5

What are the major challenges associated with ACEJMC accreditation, and how do these challenges impact different types of journalism programs?

ACEJMC accreditation faces several key challenges, including high costs related to fees, site visits, and faculty time. It also involves limited flexibility in curriculum design and course offerings. A significant critique is its focus on inputs like resources rather than student outcomes, creating barriers for smaller programs that struggle to meet standards with limited resources. This input-focused approach may not adequately capture the dynamic and innovative approaches that some smaller programs adopt to maximize their impact.

Newsletter Subscribe

Subscribe to get the latest articles and insights directly in your inbox.