A | B | C | D | E | I | L | M | P | S | W

Accounting Accreditation Committee (AAC)
Appoints Peer Review Teams to assist the applicants in the Initial Accounting and Maintenance of Accounting Accreditation Processes, and reviews initial accounting accreditation and accounting maintenance of accreditation recommendations.

Accounting Accreditation Committee Liaison
A member of the AAC who serves as the principal point of contact and communication between the AAC, PAC, Mentor, and peer review team in the initial accreditation phase, or between the AAC and peer review team in the maintenance phase.

Accreditation Coordinating Committee (AAC)
Coordinates the work of the operating committees (AAC, IAC, and MAC) and authorizes improvements to the processes and procedures supporting accreditation activities. The ACC also reviews satisfaction of the Eligibility Criteria for schools in all stages of the accreditation process and determines the scope of an institution's accreditation review.

Accreditation Council
Members who have achieved AACSB International accreditation.

Accreditation Quality Committee (AQC)
Reviews the accreditation standards and processes for continuous improvement changes.

Accreditation Recommendations—Initial
Peer review team recommendation to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC). The peer review team can recommend accreditation, a one-year deferral, or denial of accreditation. The team recommendation consists of a written team visit report that includes the recommendation and a standard-by-standard analysis and evaluation. Recommendations for initial accreditation and denial of accreditation must be considered for ratification by the Board of Directors.

Accreditation Recommendations—Maintenance
Peer Review Team recommendation can be extension of accreditation or sixth year review. Sixth Year Review Team recommendation can be extension of accreditation or continuing review. Continuing Review Team recommendation can be extension of accreditation or suspension. The appropriate accreditation committee must review all team recommendations for concurrence. Immediate suspension of accreditation can result for cause at any time. Recommendations and concurrence for extension of accreditation and suspension of accreditation must be considered for ratification by the Board of Directors.

Accreditation Statistical Reports
Reports provided (upon request) to the applicant and Peer Review Team members for use as background information in the accreditation review.

Applicant
The department, school, or program unit that is responsible for the degree programs under review. AACSB International accreditation is achieved and awarded to the member institution for all degree programs in business that it offers (except specifically excluded programs).

Aspirant Groups
A list of schools that provides developmental goals for the applicant, represents management education programs or features that the applicant hopes to emulate, and places the vision and strategy of the applicant in context. The list may be of any number.

Business School Questionnaire (BSQ)
Request for annual data from AACSB International to all accreditation council members. Some of these data are included in the accreditation statistical reports.

Comparable Peers
A list of schools considered similar in mission and assumed to be appropriate for performance comparison. A minimum of six comparable schools must be provided.

Comparison Groups
Three types of comparison groups are involved in the accreditation process: comparable peers, a competitive group, and an aspirant group. Comparison groups provide relevant context for judgment, and inform strategic planning activities. Schools within the comparable peer group or aspirant group may be selected as PRT members.

Competitive Groups
A list of schools so directly competitive that conflict of interest considerations exclude their personnel from the review process of the applicant. The list may be of any number. Only those schools should be included where the direct competition for students, faculty, or resources is so compelling that the appearance of a conflict of interest is present.

Consultative Feedback (PreAccreditation)
Mentors are encouraged to provide consultative advice relevant to the expectation of continuous improvement. This advice is separate from the Standards Alignment Plan recommendation.

Consultative Feedback (Initial Accreditation)
Peer review teams are encouraged to provide consultative advice relevant to the expectation of continuous improvement. This advice is separate from the accreditation recommendation.

Consultative Report
Report included in the Peer Review Team Visit Report. The report consists of consultative advice that is not relevant to the accreditation recommendation.

Continuing Review
Additional review for up to two years beyond the sixth year review.

Continuing Review Team
Mutually agreed upon team consisting of one member from the Sixth Year or Peer Review Team and one from (or appointed by) the relevant accreditation committee. The Continuing Review Team evaluates progress and resolution of specific standards-related quality items identified by the Sixth Year Review Visit Report.

Degree Programs
Undergraduate, master's, doctoral, and other equivalent degrees awarded by an institution.

Diversity
In its mission, a school should define the populations it serves, consider its role in creating opportunities for under-served groups, and show how it endeavors to make sure that a variety of perspectives are included in all educational activities.

Effective Practices
Exceptional practices that demonstrate leadership and high quality continuous improvement in management education, noted by the Mentor in his/her summary report and/or the Peer Review Team in its Visit Report.

Eligibility Application
Application submitted to AACSB to establish whether an institution meets the criteria to be eligible for accreditation by AACSB International.

Exclusion of Program(s)
Programs excluded from the accreditation review as described in the eligibility section of the accreditation standards.

Executive Summary
Background information provided by the applicant, which can be up to five pages in length, including a list of self-proposed effective practices.

Fifth Year Maintenance Report
Report includes materials to inform the Peer Review Team before and during the fifth year maintenance review.

Gap Analysis
A systematic analysis of the applicant's strengths and weaknesses relative to each of the AACSB standards for accreditation and relative to the applicant's unique mission and strategic management objectives.

Initial Accreditation
Accreditation granted for a five-year period with a review in the fifth year.

Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC)
Oversees the initial accreditation process, to include but not limited to, appointment of peer review teams and the review and acceptance of plan implementation reports, draft pre visit letters and the initial accreditation recommendation.

Initial Accreditation Committee Liaison
A member of the IAC who serves as the principal point of contact and communication between the Initial Accreditation Committee, Mentor, and/or Peer Review Team.

Institution
The member organization of AACSB International. Usually a larger academic organization than the business school being reviewed.

Maintenance of Accreditation
The process or set of activities and results required to maintain accreditation. This process is not a standard-by-standard review. It is an ongoing review which emphasizes continuous improvement to maintain the accreditation status. Accreditation is extended for six years with a review in the fifth year.

Maintenance of Accreditation Committee (MAC)
Appoints a Peer Review Team to assist the applicant in the maintenance of accreditation process, and reviews the maintenance of accreditation recommendation.

Maintenance Review Application (MRA)
The set of documents required for participation in the maintenance of accreditation process.

Maintenance Review Visit Report
The report written by the Peer Review Team for the applicant and for review by the appropriate accreditation committee.

Mentor
Individual assigned to assist an applicant during the PreAccreditation Process. The Mentor reviews the Eligibility Application and facilitates development of the Standards Alignment Plan and provides comments and recommendations. During implementation of the Plan, the Mentor continues to provide comments to the IAC.

Mentor Summary Report
A summary report drafted by the Mentor subsequent to the on-site visit to the applicant institution. The report consists of three distinct sections: the standard-by-standard summary report, the eligibility criteria recommendation report and the Mentor visit schedule.

Peer Review Team (PRT)
Mutually agreed upon team, normally chosen from the submitted Comparable Peer or Aspirant Groups. The PRT performs the accreditation review and makes a recommendation to the appropriate accreditation committee.

Peer Review Team Chair (Initial Accreditation)
Chosen from the applicant's submitted Comparable Peer or Aspirant Groups about two years in advance of the on-site review. The Chair assumes the responsibility of the mentor as the school develops the Self Evaluation Report and prepares for the initial accreditation visit.

Previsit Letter
Letter written by the PRT to the applicant based on the Self-Evaluation Report recommending whether or not a visit should take place. The letter typically includes requests for information to be submitted before a visit takes place as well as information that should be available during the visit. The previsit letter typically includes a standard-by-standard analysis of the Self-Evaluation Report.

Plan Implementation Reports (PIR)
Plan implementation report to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC) on the progress the applicant has made on its Alignment Plan.

Scope of Accreditation
The degree programs that are included in the accreditation review.

Self-Assessment
A systematic analysis of the business academic unit's mission, faculty, students, curriculum, instructional resources, operations, intellectual contributions, and processes, which provides the basis upon which a realistic and comprehensive Standards Alignment Plan can be developed.

Self-Evaluation Report (SER)
Report submitted to the PRT detailing how the applicant meets the standards for accreditation by AACSB International.

Sixth Year Review
Additional review conducted in the sixth year on those standards-related issues specifically identified as problematic in the maintenance of accreditation review.

Sixth Year Review Team
Mutually agreed upon team consisting of one member from the Peer Review Team and one from (or appointed by) the appropriate accreditation committee. The team evaluates resolution of specific standards-related quality issues.

Standards Alignment Plan (SAP)
A plan that establishes the agenda for meeting the AACSB standards for accreditation and achieving the mission and objectives of the applicant seeking accreditation.

Standards Alignment Plan Progress Report
If the plan is not completed within one year, the school must submit a report to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC) or the Accounting Accreditation Committee (AAC) to provide information regarding the progress of the school towards the development of the SAP.

Standards Alignment Plan Recommendation
Mentor recommendation to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC). The Mentor can recommend acceptance or non-acceptance of the Alignment Plan by the Initial Accreditation Committees. The Mentor recommendation consists of a written report in the form of the SAP Review Template.

Strategic Management Plan
The systematic planning and implementation for the prioritized use of resources to accomplish the stated mission.

Suspension of Accreditation
Loss of membership in the Accreditation Council.

Withdrawal of Application by Applicant
Action available to applicant any time prior to consideration by the Board of Directors. In the case of an accredited school in the maintenance of accreditation process, withdrawal from the process is also withdrawal from the Accreditation Council.