Our Approach

An accreditation review should tell an institution something true and useful, and tell the public something they can rely on. Five principles guide how HCDE goes about it.

Five principles

Evidence first

Claims are tested against documents, records and, where useful, conversations with staff and learners.

Proportionate

The depth of a review fits the size, scope and risk of what is being reviewed. A small training provider is not held to the paperwork of a large university.

Improvement-minded

Findings are specific and actionable. Recommendations say what to change and why.

Learner-centred

The test of every standard is its effect on the learner: what they are told, how they are taught, how they are assessed and what they are left holding.

Consistent and explained

The same standards apply to everyone, and every judgement comes with its reasons.

Reviewing distance and online education

HCDE's standards were written for education that is delivered at a distance. That changes what reviewers look for. A physical library or lecture theatre matters less than reliable platforms, accessible materials, responsive instructors, secure assessment and records that can be verified from anywhere.

Reviews can be carried out largely by document and remote meeting, and a visit is made where the scope or the evidence calls for one.

What reviewers do

Read the self-study and the evidence and ask for what is missing.
Meet staff, and where appropriate learners, graduates or employers.
Test a selection of records: admissions, assessment, complaints and certificates.
Write a report setting out findings against each standard, with strengths, recommendations and any conditions.

What reviewers do not do

They do not decide the outcome. The Accreditation Committee does.
They do not advise the institution under review on how to pass.
They do not accept gifts or hospitality from applicants.

What we ask of institutions

Honesty, access to evidence and a willingness to act on findings. An institution that finds problems itself, and shows what it will do about them, is in a stronger position than one that claims to have none.

The detailed stages are in Accreditation Process and the criteria in the Accreditation Standards.