Author: accreditation.biz

Posted on

How AACSB Accreditation Supports the Enterprise University Model

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

What is an Enterprise University?

The term Enterprise University is often used to refer to a higher education institution that aligns its operations, programs, and culture with the market needs, emphasizing innovation, entrepreneurship, and industry partnerships. Enterprise universities focus on integrating academic and industry practices to prepare students for the workforce. On the academic side, enterprise universities foster innovative teaching and research that directly benefits the economy and society at large.

Defining Characteristics of an Enterprise University

While specific practices may vary among universities aspiring to align with the enterprise university vision, some of the defining characteristics of enterprise universities include the following: 

    • Industry Collaborations: These universities actively collaborate with businesses, industries, and government agencies to develop programs that align with market needs.
    • Entrepreneurial Focus: They encourage entrepreneurial thinking among students and faculty, often providing support for such activities via incubators, accelerators, and funding for startups.
    • Research Commercialization: They foster research that is focused on solving real-world problems. The emphasis is on technology transfer, patents, and bringing innovations to market.
    • Skill-Oriented Programs: Curriculum design emphasizes practical skills that improve employability of students. This is often achieved by offering internships, co-op programs, and certifications in addition to academic degrees.
    • Flexible Learning Models: These universities often offer online, hybrid, and modular learning to cater to diverse groups of learners, including working professionals.
    • Revenue Diversification: They seek to diversify funding through grants, endowments, corporate training, consulting, etc., reducing reliance on student tuition and government funding.

How AACSB Supports Enterprise University Vision

Engagement with relevant stakeholders, innovation that improves attainment of relevant outcomes, and focus on positive societal impact are defining characteristics of AACSB accreditation philosophy. These central elements of AACSB accreditation philosophy are also well-aligned with the goals of an enterprise university. Specifically, AACSB accreditation can support an enterprise university vision in the following ways:

    • Promoting Industry-Relevant Education: AACSB Standards emphasize integrating current business practices and trends into curricula. AACSB also encourages partnerships with industries to design programs that address workforce needs and emerging technologies.
    • Fostering Innovation and Entrepreneurship: AACSB standards require innovation in teaching, research, and engagement, which directly supports entrepreneurial initiatives.
    • Enhancing Credibility among Potential Partners and Stakeholders: AACSB accreditation signals high-quality education to students, employers, and funding agencies. This reputation can help attract partnerships, funding, and talented faculty and students.
    • Encouraging Research with Impact: AACSB requires business schools to focus on producing impactful research that addresses societal and economic challenges. This aligns with the enterprise university’s goal of solving real-world problems through research and its commercialization.
    • Strengthening Global Networks: AACSB accreditation gives universities access to a global network of accredited institutions, fostering international partnerships. These connections can lead to joint research, global internships, and industry project partnerships that enhance enterprise-oriented outcomes.

Conclusion

AACSB supports the enterprise university vision by helping business schools embed innovation, market relevance, and stakeholder engagement into their operations. The accreditation framework helps business schools build stronger industry ties, develop impactful research, and prepare students for the workforce, aligning perfectly with the goals of an enterprise university.

Posted on

Altmetrics

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

What is Altmetrics?

Altmetrics, short for “alternative metrics,” are non-traditional measures that assess the reach and influence of academic research by assessing online attention and engagement that the research produces. Unlike traditional scholarly metrics like number of citations, h-index, and journal impact factor, altmetrics capture the broader, real-time impact of research on various platforms, such as social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn), news outlets, blogs, policy documents, online repositories (e.g., GitHub, Figshare), and various academic platforms (e.g. Mendeley, ResearchGate). 

Altmetrics provide a broader and more diverse perspective on the impact of research, particularly its societal, professional, and educational relevance. Moreover, altmetrics can help a business school align its research strategy with its mission and AACSB Standard 8, which deals with the impact produced by a business school’s portfolio of intellectual contributions. 

How Altmetrics Measure Research Impact

In order to measure research engagement and impact online, altmetrics may use the following metrics:

    • Mentions in Social Media: Measuring how often a study is shared or discussed on platforms like Twitter or Reddit.
    • Policy Citations: Tracking references in government and organizational policy documents.
    • Media Coverage: Counting mentions in mainstream and specialized news outlets.
    • Public Usage: Analyzing usage and engagement in non-academic contexts, such as clinical practice guidelines, teaching resources, or public discussions.
    • Online Accessibility: Assessing the frequency with which research outputs are viewed, downloaded, or interacted with on various academic and non-academic platforms.

Altmetrics tools like Altmetric.com and PlumX aggregate and visualize these data to help researchers and institutions understand their research’s digital footprint and societal reach.

Relation to AACSB Standard 8 – Impact of Scholarship

AACSB Standard 8 emphasizes that the impact of scholarship is a key criterion for assessing academic excellence of business schools.  The standard requires schools to demonstrate that their faculty’s research and intellectual contributions are relevant, impactful, and aligned with the school’s mission. Altmetrics align with AACSB Standard 8 in several ways:

    • Broadening Impact Assessment: Altmetrics capture the societal and practical impact of research, showcasing its value beyond traditional academic measures like citations. This broader scope supports AACSB’s emphasis on demonstrating tangible benefits to businesses, communities, and broader society.
    • Real-Time Feedback: Unlike traditional metrics that take years to materialize, altmetrics can provide real-time data on how research is received, discussed, and applied. This helps schools quickly assess the relevance and effectiveness of their scholarly output.
    • Demonstrating Relevance: Altmetrics data can highlight how faculty research aligns with industry needs, public policy, or community issues, reinforcing AACSB’s focus on relevance to practice and societal engagement.
    • Strategic Insights for Schools: Schools can use altmetrics to align research strategies with their mission, identifying areas where faculty scholarship has (or should have) significant societal or economic impact.
    • Showcasing Stakeholder Engagement: By reflecting public, media, and policy engagement, altmetrics demonstrate how research contributes to broader conversations and decision-making processes, a key aspect of scholarship impact under AACSB standards.

Conclusion

Altmetrics provide a valuable tool for demonstrating and measuring the broader impact of scholarship in ways that align with AACSB Standard 8. By showcasing the societal, policy, and professional influence of research, altmetrics help institutions fulfill the AACSB’s requirement that accredited business schools should produce scholarship that matters to a wide range of stakeholders that a business school serves. 

Posted on

The Association of African Business Schools (AABS) Accreditation

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

What is AABS Accreditation?

The Association of African Business Schools (AABS) is based on a rigorous, peer-reviewed process that assesses and certifies the quality of business schools in Africa. It is designed to ensure that accredited business schools in Africa meet world-class standards in education, research, and societal impact while also addressing the unique challenges and opportunities of the African context. Schools that earn this accreditation distinguish themselves as leaders in business education in Africa, with a commitment to continuous improvement and innovation.

The Value of AABS Accreditation

The principle value dimensions of AABS accreditation are as follows: 

    1. Quality Assurance: AABS accreditation certifies that a business school meets high standards in faculty qualifications, curriculum design, student outcomes, and institutional governance. Moreover, the school is committed to continuous improvement in these important areas of business education. The accreditation also acts as a seal of approval that attracts students, faculty, and partners who value excellence.
    2. Relevance to Africa: AABS emphasizes addressing local challenges and opportunities related to socio-economic development, sustainability, and entrepreneurship. Accredited schools are equipped to produce graduates who can drive change within their communities and beyond.
    3. Networking Opportunities: Accreditation connects schools to a network of peer institutions, fostering collaboration in research, faculty exchange, and best practices.

AABS Standards

The AABS accreditation encompasses 11 standards, categorized into six key areas:

    1. Relevance to the African Context: Ensures that the institution’s mission and activities are attuned to the national, political, legal, social, and economic environments of Africa.
    2. Institution: Evaluates governance structures, strategic vision, and resource allocation to ensure effective and efficient management.
    3. Stakeholders: Assesses relationships with students, alumni, corporate partners, and other educational institutions, emphasizing stakeholder engagement and market relevance.
    4. Program Portfolio: Reviews the diversity and quality of programs and research initiatives, focusing on curriculum development, teaching methodologies, and the pertinence of learning materials.
    5. Impact on Africa: Demonstrates the institution’s contribution to inclusive economic and social development within the continent.
    6. Sustainability: Ensures that the institution’s approach to management education is sustainable, with a commitment to continuous improvement and long-term relevance.

AABS Accreditation Process

AABS is based on a rigorous and comprehensive accreditation process structured into eight distinct phases: 

    1. Expression of Interest: Institutions initiate the process by submitting a Letter of Interest to the AABS Accreditation Office, demonstrating their commitment to pursuing accreditation.
    2. Application: Upon acknowledgment, schools complete the AABS Accreditation Application Form, providing detailed information about their programs and operations.
    3. Mentorship: Accepted institutions may be assigned a mentor—typically an experienced dean or senior academic—to guide them through the self-review phase, ensuring alignment with AABS standards.
    4. Self-Review Report (SRR): Schools conduct a thorough self-evaluation against AABS standards, compiling a comprehensive report that highlights strengths, identifies areas for improvement, and outlines strategies for enhancement.
    5. Accreditation Visit: A designated AABS Review Team conducts an on-site evaluation to validate the SRR, engage with stakeholders, and assess the institution’s adherence to accreditation standards.
    6. Accreditation Decision: The AABS Board reviews the findings and decides on accreditation status, which, if granted, is valid for five years.
    7. Post-Accreditation: Accredited schools commit to ongoing quality enhancement and are required to submit a Mid-Term Report two and a half years after accreditation, detailing progress and continuous improvement efforts.
    8. Re-Accreditation: Institutions seeking to renew their accreditation must apply at least 18 months before the current accreditation expires, initiating a new cycle of evaluation.

Challenges and Opportunities of AABS Accreditation

Achieving AABS accreditation often requires a business school in Africa to overcome certain challenges, while also presenting the school with numerous opportunities. Business education in Africa is plagued by resource scarcity, political instability, and varying levels of institutional maturity among the business schools and related organizations.  However, the accreditation process itself acts as a catalyst for improvement, prompting schools to address gaps and align with international best practices. Additionally, accreditation positions schools to attract investments, partnerships, and top-tier talent, further boosting their growth and impact.

Posted on

AACSB and QS World University Rankings

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

In today’s increasingly competitive global educational landscape, universities from all over the world invest substantial resources in improving their positions in international ranking systems, such as QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World University Rankings. Achieving a high rank in such systems reflects a university’s excellence in such key areas like academic reputation, research impact, and graduate employability. In addition to serving as a formal recognition of the university’s quality and reputation, these rankings influence the perceptions of prospective students, faculty, employers, and other stakeholders. Thus, a high rank within a widely recognized ranking system  helps a university to attract top student and faculty talent, secure funding, and establish global partnerships. 

International accreditations for business schools, such as the AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business), play a pivotal role in enhancing a university’s standing in these rankings. Specifically, AACSB accreditation ensures adherence to rigorous global standards in education, faculty quality, and research output, directly contributing to metrics evaluated in QS rankings. 

QS World University Rankings Methodology

To qualify for inclusion in QS World University Rankings Methodology, a university must:

    1. Offer both undergraduate and postgraduate programs.
    2. Engage in academic work across at least two of five broad faculty areas:
      • Arts and Humanities
      • Engineering and Technology
      • Social Sciences and Management
      • Natural Sciences
      • Life Sciences and Medicine

The QS World University Rankings evaluates qualified universities based on six key performance indicators provided below. These criteria assess various aspects of research, teaching, employability, and internationalization, ensuring a holistic view of an institution’s performance.

    1. Academic Reputation (40%): Derived from a global academic survey, where scholars identify top institutions in their fields. Reflects the perception of academic excellence.
    2. Employer Reputation (10%): Based on feedback from graduate employers worldwide, highlighting institutions that produce exceptional graduates. Represents employability and industry impact.
    3. Student-to-Faculty Ratio (20%): Indicates the quality of teaching and the level of student support, with lower ratios suggesting more personalized education.
    4. Research Citations per Faculty Member (20%): Measures the influence and quality of an institution’s research output, normalized across subject areas. Highlights the institution’s research impact.
    5. Proportion of International Faculty (5%): Assesses the institution’s ability to attract faculty from around the globe, reflecting global engagement.
    6. Proportion of International Students (5%): Measures the diversity of the student body, showcasing the institution’s appeal to students from various countries.

These metrics collectively offer insights into a university’s strengths, enabling prospective students and stakeholders to make informed decisions.

How AACSB Accreditation can Enhance QS World University Rankings

AACSB accreditation can help a university improve its QS World University Rankings in the following ways:

    1. Enhanced Academic Reputation: QS rankings give significant weight to academic reputation of a university. AACSB accreditation is a prestigious and highly selective international recognition that serves as a seal of excellence in business education. Institutions with AACSB accreditation are seen as providing higher-quality education – something that can positively impact the university’s academic reputation in the eyes of peers and employers.
    2. Quality of Faculty and Research: AACSB accreditation places strong emphasis on faculty qualifications and their research output. Pursuing AACSB accreditation usually leads to improvement in faculty credentials as well as the quality and impact of their research. Research quality and impact are some of the key metrics in QS rankings. With AACSB, a university is likely to attract better-qualified faculty with a more visible and impactful portfolio of intellectual contributions, boosting its international academic profile and research impact.
    3. Student Employability: QS rankings system considers the employability of graduates as a major factor. AACSB-accredited institutions often have stronger connections and better reputation with industry and provide curricula that are more aligned with market needs. As a result, graduates from AACSB-accredited programs tend to have higher employment rates and better career outcomes, improving the university’s standing in QS employability metrics.
    4. Internationalization and Global Recognition: AACSB is a globally recognized accreditation body for business schools. Being accredited by AACSB can help an institution gain international recognition and attract international students and faculty. International diversity is a key factor in QS rankings. Thus, enhanced global visibility obtained via the “AACSB accredited”, can give a university a big boost in this area of QS rankings.
    5. Focus on Continuous Improvement: AACSB-accredited institutions are required to undergo continuous assessment and improvement processes. This focus on institutional growth, innovation, and maintaining high standards ensures that the university is constantly evolving to meet global educational trends, which positively influences multiple QS ranking factors like research impact, faculty quality, and employer reputation.
    6. Attracting High-Quality Partnerships: Universities with AACSB accreditation often have better opportunities to form partnerships with leading global institutions. Obtaining AACSB accreditation opens many partnership opportunities with some of the world’s finest business schools, allowing the institution to enhance collaboration in research, student exchanges, and faculty development. This can improve the university’s international profile and increase its overall ranking in QS.

Synergy between AACSB and QS World University Rankings

It is clear that that there is a strong synergy between AACSB accreditation and the QS World University Rankings. While QS rankings offer guidance and a comprehensive evaluation of a university’s performance across key metrics such as academic reputation, research impact, and employability, AACSB accreditation strengthens these areas by ensuring excellence in business education, faculty quality, and numerous institutional practices. Together, AACSB and QS World University Rankings provide a powerful framework for universities to enhance their global standing, attract top talent, and establish impactful partnerships. As the global educational landscape continues to evolve and becomes more and more competitive, leveraging such recognitions becomes essential for institutions aiming to remain competitive and deliver exceptional value to students, faculty, and stakeholders worldwide.

Posted on

How does AACSB accreditation benefit faculty and staff?

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) accreditation is widely recognized as a prestigious mark of excellence in business education. While the benefits of AACSB accreditation are often discussed in terms of institutional reputation and student outcomes, the positive impact of AACSB accreditation on faculty and staff working conditions is equally significant. Business schools that gain AACSB accreditation not only enhance their academic programs and research profiles, but also create a more supportive, rewarding, stable, and collegial work environment for faculty and staff. 

Obtaining and maintaining AACSB accreditation can provide faculty and staff at business schools with many benefits, including: 

Enhanced Institutional Support. The pursuit of AACSB accreditation often leads to stronger institutional support for faculty and staff initiatives, including research funding, administrative assistance, and access to various institutional resources. This support can make the working environment more conducive to professional growth and satisfaction.

Support for Professional Development. AACSB-accredited institutions are committed to ensuring their faculty members are highly qualified and engaged in ongoing professional development. This often translates into more funding and opportunities for faculty to attend conferences, workshops, and pursue advanced research, which can enhance their careers and job satisfaction.

Competitive Compensation and Benefits. To attract and retain top talent that can help the business school pursue its mission, AACSB-accredited schools often offer more competitive salaries and benefits packages. The prestige and importance associated with AACSB accreditation can justify higher compensation levels, which can improve overall job satisfaction and financial well-being.

Emphasis on Research. AACSB places a strong emphasis on research and scholarly activities. Accredited schools are more likely to provide faculty with the resources, time, and support needed to engage in research, which can lead to a more fulfilling academic experience and reduce burnout associated with heavy teaching loads.

Collaborative Work Environment. The process of achieving and maintaining AACSB accreditation often fosters a culture of collaboration and continuous improvement. Faculty and staff may benefit from a more collegial atmosphere where teamwork is valued, leading to a more positive and supportive work environment.

Improved Facilities and Resources. To meet AACSB standards, schools may invest in upgrading their facilities, technology, research infrastructure, and learning resources. This can create a more comfortable and efficient working environment for faculty and staff, with access to modern tools and infrastructure that support their work.

Recognition and Prestige. Working at an AACSB-accredited institution can enhance the professional reputation of faculty and staff, providing them with greater recognition in their field. This prestige can lead to increased opportunities for career advancement, both within the institution and externally.

Balanced Workload. AACSB standards encourage a balance between teaching, research, and service responsibilities. This balance can lead to more manageable workloads for faculty, reducing stress and improving work-life balance. The focus on quality rather than quantity in teaching can also lead to smaller class sizes and more meaningful interactions with students.

Job Security and Stability. The commitment to continuous improvement and adherence to high standards associated with AACSB accreditation can contribute to the long-term stability of the business school. This stability can translate into greater job security for faculty and staff, reducing the uncertainty that can come with working in academia.

Access to a Global Network. Being part of an AACSB-accredited institution provides faculty and staff with access to a global network of peers, resources, and collaborative opportunities. This can enrich their professional lives and create opportunities for international collaboration, research, and exchanges.

In conclusion, AACSB accreditation serves as a catalyst for improved working conditions for faculty and staff. By fostering a culture of continuous improvement, providing access to enhanced resources, and promoting professional development, AACSB-accredited institutions create an environment where faculty and staff can thrive. The resulting improvements in job satisfaction, work-life balance, and professional opportunities contribute to a more engaged and motivated workforce, ultimately benefiting both the business school and its most important stakeholders, such as students, employers, and the community at large. 

Posted on

What is indirect assessment?

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

The term indirect assessment refers to methods of evaluating student learning and outcomes based on perceptions, reflections, and other methods that do not directly assess student knowledge or skills. Typical indirect assessment tools include alumni surveys, interviews with graduating students, employer focus groups, reviews of students’ reflective essays, etc. Indirect assessment is designed to gather data on student experiences, satisfaction, and perceived learning outside the traditional classroom environment, to better understand the effectiveness of educational programs and practices.

AACSB standards emphasize the importance of both direct and indirect assessment in demonstrating a school’s commitment to excellence. There are several reasons why indirect assessment is important for AACSB and other accreditation agencies: 

    • Comprehensive Evaluation: Indirect assessment complements direct assessment methods (such as exams, projects, and practical demonstrations) by providing a more holistic view of student learning and program effectiveness.

    • Student Feedback: indirect assessment captures students’ perspectives on their learning experiences, which can highlight strengths and weaknesses in the curriculum, teaching methods, and overall educational environment.

    • Stakeholder Engagement: Indirect assessment involves engaging various stakeholders, including students, alumni, and employers, which can strengthen the connection between the school and its broader community. This engagement can provide valuable feedback for aligning educational programs with the needs and expectations of these stakeholders.

In summary, indirect assessment is a crucial component of accreditation because it helps ensure that business schools are not only achieving their educational goals but also continuously improving and meeting the needs of their students and other stakeholders.

Posted on

Predatory Academic Journals and Accreditation

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

Predatory journals are exploitative academic publishing platforms that charge authors high submission fees but fail to provide the legitimate services associated with reputable academic journals, such as peer review and editorial oversight. These journals often promise quick publication times and lack transparency in their operations. The term “predatory” is used because these journals prey on the need of researchers to publish their work for career advancement, academic requirement, or visibility, without actually contributing to the scholarly discourse in a meaningful way. Predatory journals pose significant challenges to the integrity and quality of academic and professional accreditation standards. In this article, we explain how to identify predatory journals and what simple strategies a business school can pursue to prevent faculty from publishing in these journals. 

Predatory academic journals come in all shapes and sizes and are not unique to a particular field. However, there are few things that predatory academic journals share in common. Typical characteristics of predatory journals include:

    • Lack of Peer Review: They often claim to conduct peer review but either do not do it or do it superficially, failing to uphold standards of academic rigor.
    • Misleading Metrics: They may claim high impact factors and indexing in reputable databases without actual inclusion or by using misleading metrics.
    • Aggressive Marketing: They frequently use spam emails to solicit manuscripts from researchers.
    • Unclear Editorial Policies: They have vague or nonexistent editorial policies and practices, making it difficult to understand their review processes or criteria for publication.
    • Dubious Practices: They may list scholars as editorial board members without their permission or knowledge, and often have fake or non-existent contact addresses.
    • Rapid Publication: They promise rapid publication, which appeals to researchers under pressure to publish but undermines the integrity of the review process.
    • High Article Processing Charges (APCs): They charge authors high fees for publishing, often without providing the expected publication services

Predatory journals pose significant challenges to the integrity and quality of academic and professional accreditation standards. Accreditation bodies evaluate academic programs, institutions, and professionals based on various criteria, including research output, publication quality, and contributions to the field. The issues with predatory journals impact these evaluations in several ways:

    • Dilution of Scholarly Quality: Accreditation relies on the quality of scholarly work produced by an institution or individual. Publications in predatory journals, which lack rigorous peer review, can dilute the overall quality of an institution’s or individual’s scholarly output. This makes it difficult for accreditation bodies to assess the true academic contribution and quality of research.
    • Misrepresentation of Academic Productivity: Predatory journals can inflate an individual’s or institution’s publication record, misleading accreditation bodies about the actual academic productivity and impact. This misrepresentation can lead to unwarranted accreditation status or recognition, undermining the credibility of the accreditation process.
    • Erosion of Trust: The involvement of faculty, researchers, or institutions with predatory journals can erode trust in their credibility and integrity. For accreditation bodies, associating with entities that lack discernment in publication venues can question their standards and the value of the accreditation they provide.
    • Resource Misallocation: Resources spent on publishing in predatory journals are resources wasted, as they do not contribute to the advancement of knowledge or the academic’s reputation in a meaningful way. This misallocation can affect the overall quality of education and research that accreditation bodies seek to ensure.
    • Compromised Evaluation Metrics: Accreditation often uses publication records as a metric for evaluating the quality and impact of academic work. Predatory journals, through their lack of quality control and dubious metrics, compromise these evaluation metrics, making it harder for accreditation bodies to rely on publication records as a measure of quality.
    • Difficulty in Distinguishing Legitimate Work: The prevalence of predatory journals makes it increasingly difficult for accreditation bodies to distinguish between legitimate and non-legitimate work. This requires them to invest additional resources in vetting publications, which can be both time-consuming and

Researchers are advised to carefully evaluate the credibility of journals before submitting their work, using tools and checklists such as the ABDC List, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Think. Check. Submit., and Beall’s List (though it’s no longer updated, it served as a significant resource for identifying potential predatory publishers). 

Moreover, a business school may decide to develop policies that give faculty members credit only for publications that are in journals listed in well-accepted lists, such as ABDC or Cabells. Additional quality criteria may also be applied to these publications. 

Posted on

Does AACSB accreditation lead to higher student enrollment?

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

Globally, AACSB accreditation is the most prestigious quality mark. It may take many years of concentrated effort and substantial financial investment to achieve AACSB accreditation. Before embarking on this accreditation journey, many business schools wonder whether their investment will yield a tangible return, especially in terms of student enrollment. 

Several studies have attempted to link AACSB accreditation to various measures of business school performance, including student enrollment. Cameron et al. (2023) find that receiving AACSB accreditation elevates a school’s ranking, potentially attracting more students. Additionally, Ito (2022) suggests that AACSB accreditation can increase graduate student enrollment, particularly for teaching-oriented business schools. This notion is challenged by the study by Doh et al. (2018), indicating that HBCU business schools do not always get more enrollment through AACSB accreditation.

It can be argued that the results are mixed because it is difficult to develop a solid, longitudinal design that ties AACSB accreditation to school performance. There are many benefits of AACSB accreditation (Ito, 2022) but it is not the only variable that affects a business school’s performance. Other forces, such as demographic trends or competition, affect enrollment much more than accreditation in some markets.

Additionally, our experience indicates that accreditation efforts can have many negative effects in the short term. Having AACSB accreditation can, for example, lead to faculty attrition (because some faculty members may not wish to adhere to higher research standards or be involved in general quality improvement) or even to a drop in student enrollment (since some students prefer schools with lower academic standards where they can earn degrees more easily). According to Cameron et al. (2023), schools pursuing AACSB accreditation have “flatter undergraduate enrollment” than those not pursuing it.

It can be argued that AACSB accreditation is largely about creating and implementing a long-term plan for improving a business school. It’s a unique journey business schools choose to take. It’s hard to predict with certainty whether this journey will result in higher enrollment. The opposite outcome is quite possible. Dumond and Johnson (2013) suggest possible drawbacks or challenges associated with AACSB accreditation processes, such as limiting business schools’ ability to adjust to change. In some cases, business schools can make a strategic mistake by abandoning their current market in favor of one in which they have no advantage. 

These errors in strategic planning, something that no business school is immune to, are likely to lead to lower enrollment. Peer Review Teams will often notice that a school lacks healthy enrollment and a viable financial position and require the school to address both. Unfortunately, not every business school can be successful at implementing these strategies, even with oversight from AACSB.

References

Cameron, M., McCannon, B. C., & Starr, K. (2023). AACSB accreditation and student demand. Southern Economic Journal, 90(2), 317-340.

Doh, L., Prince, D., McLain, M., & Credle, S. (2018). The impact of the AACSB accreditation on enrollment growth at HBCU(historically black colleges and universities) business schools. Pressacademia, 5(2), 130-141.

Dumond, E. J., & Johnson, T. W. (2013). Managing university business educational quality: ISO or AACSB?. Quality Assurance in Education, 21(2), 127-144.

Ito, H. (2022). Competing through international accreditation: cost-benefit analysis and process of AACSB for a business school in Japan. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(7), 1380-1393. 

Posted on

Policy for Ethical Use of Conversational Generative AI Chatbots in Student Assignments

1. Introduction:

This policy serves as a framework for the ethical use of Conversational Generative AI Chatbots (GAI Chatbots) by students in their assignments. It aims to strike a balance between harnessing the potential of these tools for learning and research while upholding academic integrity and ethical conduct. Students are encouraged to embrace the educational value of GAI Chatbots while respecting the principles outlined in this policy.

2. Purpose:

The purpose of this policy is to ensure that students employ GAI Chatbots in a responsible and ethical manner that does not impede their academic progress and fosters the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

3. Responsible Use:

Students using GAI Chatbots should adhere to the following principles of responsible use:

a. Academic Honesty: Students are expected to uphold academic integrity and honesty in their assignments. The use of GAI Chatbots should not involve plagiarism or submitting work as their own if it is primarily generated by the chatbot.

b. Proper Attribution: If students utilize GAI Chatbots to generate content, they should appropriately attribute the assistance provided by the chatbot and make it clear that the content is generated with the help of AI.

c. Independent Learning: GAI Chatbots can serve as educational aids, but students should not overly rely on them to complete assignments. The primary goal is for students to develop their own skills and understanding.

4. Privacy and Data Security:

Students should ensure that they do not share personal or sensitive information while interacting with GAI Chatbots. They should also be cautious when using chatbots that require data input, making sure they comply with privacy regulations and institution-specific policies.

5. Contextual Applicability:

Students should evaluate the context in which they use GAI Chatbots. These tools may be more suitable for certain assignments and less so for others. Students should assess whether using a GAI Chatbot aligns with the learning objectives of their assignment.

6. Critical Thinking and Review:

Students should critically review and assess the output generated by GAI Chatbots. They are encouraged to verify and refine the content provided by the chatbot to ensure its accuracy and relevance to the assignment.

7. Collaboration and Peer Review:

Students are encouraged to collaborate with peers and instructors to review and discuss the content generated by GAI Chatbots. Peer review and discussion can help improve the quality of work and reinforce ethical practices.

8. Compliance with Academic Institution Policies:

Students must adhere to the academic policies and guidelines of their respective institution regarding the use of AI tools in assignments and should be responsible for utilizing the GAI Chatbot according to these policies. This includes understanding any specific rules or expectations related to GAI Chatbot use provided by instructors for specific courses and assignments. This policy should not override any of the GAI-related rules and instructions set forth by institutions, colleges, departments, specific programs, or individual instructors. 

9. Reporting Ethical Concerns:

If students encounter ethical concerns related to the use of GAI Chatbots, they should report these concerns to their instructors or academic institutions for appropriate guidance and resolution.

10. Accountability and Consequences:

Students are accountable for their adherence to this policy. Violations of these ethical guidelines may lead to academic penalties, including failing grades or disciplinary actions.

11. Review and Updates:

This policy should be reviewed periodically to ensure its relevance and compliance with evolving educational standards and technological advancements.

This policy was generated with the help of ChatGPT and can be used and distributed freely under the CC BY license.

Posted on

Ethical and Legal Risks of Using Generative AI in Academic Research

By Dr. Vlad Krotov

Academic research has been transformed by the advent of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI). AI continues to expand the limits of what is possible for scholars as they utilize its capabilities to enhance their intellectual endeavors.  

Using GAI in academic research has its ethical and legal risks, however. There is still a large gray area when it comes to the legality and ethics of using GAI in academic research, which researchers, legal experts, and the general public need to clarify. To navigate these uncharted waters, the academic community must tread cautiously.

This article examines the ethical and legal risks associated with the use of GAI in academic research. Questions surrounding authorship, plagiarism, bias, transparency, and value of academic research dominate the ethical landscape. Data privacy, intellectual property rights, and copyright law are pressing legal concerns. This article explores these ethical and legal issues in more detail. 

This article is not intended to provide legal advice or to serve as a final judgment regarding what is illegal or unethical regarding GAI use. A licensed legal professional should be consulted if you need legal advice on GAI. This article merely aims to raise awareness about the legal and ethical risks associated with academics using GAI. 

Copyright

Copyrighted materials are used by some GAI tools to train their models. Using GAI to create your text may result in you using copyrighted content without giving the original sources proper attribution. In addition, if a substantial portion of your text has been written by GAI, then this text isn’t your own original and creative work. As a result, you may not be able to claim copyright for your own work. When you submit your article to a journal, the situation becomes even more complicated. When an article is published, most journals require authors to transfer copyright to them. Using GAI may not grant you complete ownership of the text, so you cannot transfer your copyright. Additionally, some of the ideas in your text may have been borrowed from another author. As a result of all these legal implications, some journals and conference proceedings decided not to review articles that contained AI-generated text. 

Data Privacy

Research shows that Internet users trust search engines like Google and Bing with their most intimate thoughts and intentions (for example, when researching a disease or finding information about someone they know). As part of their “prompts”, academics can submit confidential or copyrighted data to GAI tools. Generally, GAI tools outline how they use user data in their privacy policies, stating that they store user information for a specific period of time. If this is the case, then you may be handling confidential or copyrighted data in an unauthorized manner by using GAI tools.

Plagiarism

The fact that some GAI tools rely on copyrighted text to train their models is exacerbated by the fact that these GAI tools are not very meticulous about citing their sources. GAI obtains most of its “knowledge” from various Web sources. It is possible that you are using someone’s data or ideas without giving them proper attribution when you use text generated by GAI in your own work. In academia, this is considered to be a weak form of plagiarism. 

Authorship

It can be questioned whether you are the author of your work if substantial portions of it were written by GAI. It is possible to compare your current writing samples, generated by GAI, with your previous work using authorship attribution tools. Your doctoral degree and tenure can be revoked if it can be proven that you did not write much of your dissertation or academic articles used in your tenure portfolio. 

Quality

A number of GAI literature review tools are meticulous when it comes to citing sources. However, it is unclear how these sources are selected for generating text. For example, when “writing” a literature review, GAI tools often omit most of the “seminal papers” – they probably use whatever papers are available. Sometimes, GAI produces misleading or incorrect text (e.g., citing papers that do not exist or providing incorrect factual information). These issues in your work can easily be detected by a human journal reviewer who is knowledgeable about your topic. Your reputation as an expert in your field may be damaged by all these quality issues in your work. 

Bias and Discrimination

Humans are still superior to AI tools when it comes to emotional intelligence. Some GAI tools may be incapable of addressing sensitive topics appropriately. When dealing with sensitive topics, humans possess a degree of emotional and social intelligence that makes them more cautious and responsible. There are also mechanisms built into GAI tools to ensure sensitive topics are handled appropriately (for example, providing a lengthy disclaimer that the question is highly controversial and may have a range of strong opinions). In spite of this, GAI tools are not sufficiently intelligent to fully understand why their responses may upset some people. As a result, some of this “insensitive” text containing implicit or explicit discrimination or bias can find its way into your own papers and books. 

Academic Goodwill

In the era of GAI, school teachers and college instructors are increasingly edgy and suspicious of students’ work. In a few seconds, GAI can generate an essay or a detailed case study. AI-detection tools will not be able to detect plagiarism if the text is paraphrased and edited. The academic community will also become less trusting when evaluating someone’s work. When reading somebody’s article, reviewers and editors will keep wondering: “did this person write this text?”, “am I reading creative, original ideas or is it a useless article generated by AI for the purposes of getting another ‘hit’ required for tenure or promotion? In contrast to what most people think, AI text detection tools are more reliable and valid. Despite this, these tools can still lead to false accusations against authors based on text analysis. All these issues are likely to strain the relationships among academics, especially when a researcher is not transparent about his or her use of GAI.

Reputation of Academic Research

The GAI can further damage the reputation of academic research among the public. There is already criticism that academic research is “useless” in many fields. By using GAI, academic papers that merely reshuffle things around and don’t offer anything new are becoming increasingly easy to generate. Some of the most popular academic journals, which are already “flooded” with submissions, are likely to receive even more submissions in the future. This will undermine their article processing capabilities and make it harder for researchers to find “gems” in the ocean of submissions. Moreover, AI-based referencing tools make it easier to generate long lists of references and citations – something some academics view as “citations spam”.  This further undermines the reputation of academic research

Conclusion

To mitigate these ethical and legal risks, researchers must be vigilant in upholding existing ethical standards towards academic research, complying with existing legal frameworks related to privacy and copyright, ensuring transparency of their use of GAI, and critically evaluating the outputs of GAI models. Open dialogue among the members of the academic community as well as clear guidelines can help the academic community navigate the complex landscape of GAI-powered research while preserving the integrity and respect of scholarly work.