Is national accreditation better than regional accreditation?

Answer

Regional Accreditation is considered to be the gold standard of accreditation, because it is the most difficult for an institution to obtain. There are 6 regional agencies that review schools within their territories. The review covers academic quality, credentials of the professors, facilities and etc. All of the schools listed on the US News and Word Report School rankings, or in such guides as Fisk, are regionally accredited (from state schools to the Ivy League schools).

On the other hand, National accreditation is seen by many to be only one step up from being unaccredited. This is because the costs and standards to be nationally accredited are much lower than those imposed by regionally accrediting agencies. National accrediting agencies don't have territories, instead they'll review schools anywhere, including internationally. For example, the University of South Africa is accredited by the Distance Education and Training Council. Most schools that are nationally accredited are either correspondence schools (i.e. completely by mail) or career and vocational schools (think Empire School of Hair Design). Because most nationally accredited schools are for-profit status, tuition at nationally accredited schools is generally much higher than tuition at regionally accredited schools (even the private ones).

Credits earned at a nationally accredited school are generally not accepted as transfer by regionally accredited schools. Also keep in mind that many employers will not offer tuition reimbursement for course taken at nationally accredited schools, and some state's licensing requirements (CPA, Paralegal etc.) can only be fulfilled with a degree from a regionally accredited school.

• What is a Certificate of Specialization?
• What classes do you have to take to get a buisness degree?
• How much schooling is needed to be a smoke jumper?