From the American Library Association:
The Committee on Accreditation (COA) of the American Library Association (ALA) announces accreditation actions taken at the 2018 ALA Annual Conference.
What follows reflects the April 2018 policy revision to section I.15 (Accreditation decisions) of Accreditation Process, Policies, and Procedures (AP3), implemented to enhance public disclosure, that went into effect for all programs beginning in May 2018.
The policy states that “any standard on which a program has follow-up reporting (following a comprehensive review or interim reporting review) is made public by the Office for Accreditation in the Directory of ALA-Accredited Programs and as a part of the usual means (e.g., press release, Accreditation Decisions and Actions Taken reports, and Prism).”
Continued Accreditation status was granted to the following programs (listed in alphabetical order by institution), with the next comprehensive review visit scheduled to take place in spring 2025:
- Master of Science in Library Science at Clarion University of Pennsylvania
Standards cited for follow-up reporting: I (systematic planning), I.4 (meaningful external and internal evaluation), II.5 (procedures for continual evaluation of curriculum), IV.6 (applies the results of evaluation of student achievement to program development), IV.7 (documented evidence to substantiate the evaluation of student learning outcomes), V.9 (access to physical and technological resources), V.10 (functional learning environment for students and faculty), V.12 (support services and facilities are appropriate), and V.13 (regular review of adequacy of access to physical resources and facilities).
- Master of Library and Information Science at the University of Denver
Standards cited for follow-up reporting: I.1 (program’s mission and goals pursued through implementation of an ongoing, broad-based, systematic planning process), I.4 (meaningful external and internal evaluation), I.5 (documented evidence to substantiate evaluation of program’s success in achieving its mission, goals and objectives), I.6 (results of mission, goals and objectives evaluation systematically used to improve program), II.5 (procedures for continual evaluation of curriculum), II.6 (documented evidence to substantiate evaluation of curriculum), II.7 (results of curriculum evaluation systematically used to improve program), III.1 (faculty capable of accomplishing program objectives), III.9 (documented evidence to substantiate evaluation of faculty), III.10 (results of faculty evaluation systematically used to improve program), V.5 (program staff support for administrative head and faculty), V.6 (financial support from parent institution), V.12 (support services and facilities are appropriate), V.13 (regular review of adequacy of access to physical resources and facilities), V.14 (documented evidence to substantiate evaluation of administration, finances, and resources), and V.15 (results of evaluation of administration, finances, and resources systematically used to improve program).
- Master of Science in Library Science at the University of Kentucky.
No Standards cited for follow-up reporting.
- Master of Library and Information Studies at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro
No Standards cited for follow-up reporting.
- Master of Library and Information Studies at the University of Rhode Island
No Standards cited for follow-up reporting.
- Master of Library and Information Studies at the University of Western Ontario
No Standards cited for follow-up reporting.ALA accreditation indicates that the program has undergone a self-evaluation process, has been externally reviewed and meets the Standards for Accreditation of Master’s Programs in Library and Information Studies, established by COA and adopted by ALA Council. COA evaluates each program for conformity to the Standards, which address systematic planning; curriculum; faculty; students; administration, finances, and resources.
Direct to Complete Announcement
About Gary Price
