A | B | C | D | E | F | G | I | M | P | R | S | U | W
AACSB Accreditation Staff Liaison
Accredited organizations and organizations in the initial accreditation process are assigned an AACSB accreditation staff liaison. This person serves as a member of the AACSB accreditation staff and serves as the organization’s main point of contact on accreditation-related matters.
Accounting Accreditation Committee Liaison
A member of the AAC who serves as the principal point of contact and communication between the AAC, IAC, mentor, and peer review team in the initial accreditation phase, or between the AAC and the mentor and team chair.
Accounting Accreditation Policy Committee (AAPC)
The Accounting Accreditation Policy Committee (AAPC) oversees policy related to AACSB accounting accreditation and quality assurance services, and engages the AACSB Innovation Committee, Business Practices Advisory Council, and accounting professional community to advance accounting accreditation. The AAPC authorizes modifications to the accounting eligibility criteria and recommends changes to the accounting accreditation standards. The AAPC also coordinates the activities of the Accounting Accreditation Committee (AAC) and collaborates with the Business Accreditation Policy Committee (BAPC).
Accounting Program Questionnaire (APQ)
Request for annual data from AACSB to all accreditation council members with supplemental accounting accreditation.
Recognition by AACSB that an institution commits to fulfill its mission and continues to sustain and improve the educational quality of its undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral degree programs according to the business or accounting standards of AACSB, as interpreted by its peer review team(s), accreditation committees, and the board of directors.
Recognition by AACSB that an institution commits to fulfill its mission and continues to sustain and improve the educational quality of its undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral degree programs according to the accounting standards of AACSB, as interpreted by its peer review team(s), accreditation committees, and the board of directors.
Members who have achieved AACSB accreditation.
Accreditation Recommendations—Continuous Improvement Review
A peer review team recommendation can be an extension of accreditation or a continuous improvement review 2 (CIR2). Continuous improvement review 2 team recommendation can be an extension of accreditation or a focused review (FR1). Focused review team recommendation can be an extension of accreditation, a focused review 2 (FR2), or revocation of accreditation. The appropriate accreditation committee must review all team recommendations for concurrence. Immediate revocation of accreditation for cause is an option at any time. Recommendations for extension of accreditation and revocation of accreditation must be considered for ratification by the board of directors.
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 Review Cycle
Once accreditation is earned, a five-year continuous improvement review cycle begins with a peer review team site visit in the fifth year.
Image that signifies the institution or unit has earned the designation of AACSB accreditation.
Applicant Profile Sheet
A brief overview and reference document of the school that the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC) uses as part of their review.
A list of schools that provides developmental goals for the applicant, represents business 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 Accreditation Policy Committee (BAPC)
The Business Accreditation Policy Committee (BAPC) oversees policy related to AACSB business accreditation and quality assurance services and engages the AACSB Innovation Committee and Business Practices Advisory Council to advance accreditation. The BAPC authorizes modifications to the business eligibility criteria and recommends changes to the business accreditation standards. The BAPC also coordinates the work of the business accreditation operating committees (Continuous Improvement Review Committee and Initial Accreditation Committee) and collaborates with the Accounting Accreditation Policy Committee (AAPC) to ensure the policies and activities of the BAPC and AAPC are consistent.
Business School Questionnaire (BSQ)
Request for annual data from AACSB to all members.
A list of schools considered similar in mission to the applicant and assumed to be appropriate for performance comparison. A minimum of six comparable schools must be provided.
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. Deans or equivalent from within the comparable peer group or aspirant group may be selected as PRT members.
A list of schools so directly competitive that conflict of interest considerations excludes 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 (Initial Accreditation Process)
Mentors and peer review teams are encouraged to provide consultative advice relevant to the expectation of continuous improvement. This advice is separate from the initial self-evaluation report recommendation.
Consultative Feedback (Accreditation Visits)
Peer review teams are encouraged to provide consultative advice relevant to the expectation of continuous improvement. This advice is separate from the accreditation recommendation.
Continuous Improvement Review
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 that emphasizes continuous improvement to maintain the accreditation status. Accreditation is extended for five years with a review in the fifth year.
Continuous Improvement Review Application (CIRA)
The set of documents required for participation in the continuous improvement review process.
Continuous Improvement Review Committee (CIRC)
Appoints a peer review team to assist the applicant in the continuous improvement review accreditation process and reviews the continuous improvement review recommendation.
Continuous Improvement Review School Report
A report that includes materials to inform the peer review team before and during the continuous improvement review.
Continuous Improvement Review Team Visit Report
The report written by the peer review team for the applicant and for review by the appropriate accreditation committee.
Continuous Improvement Review 2
Additional review conducted in the second year of the continuous improvement review focused solely on the standards-related issues specifically identified as deficient in the first year of the continuous improvement review.
Continuous Improvement Review 2 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.
Additional review for one year beyond an initial accreditation visit.
The deferral team selected by the relevant accreditation committee, normally includes one member from the original peer review team and one member from (or appointed by) the committee.
Undergraduate, master's, doctoral, and other equivalent degrees awarded by an institution.
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.
Exceptional practices that demonstrate leadership and high-quality continuous improvement in management or accounting education, noted by the mentor in their summary report and/or by the peer review team in its visit report.
Application submitted to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC) or Accounting Accreditation Committee (AAC) to establish whether an institution or accounting unit meets the criteria to be eligible for accreditation by AACSB.
Please note, the eligibility criteria are found in the 2013 business accreditation standards and the 2018 accounting accreditation standards. Eligibility criteria are not in the 2020 business accreditation standards.
A series of core values that AACSB believes are important and provide a foundation for accreditation.
Exclusion of Program(s)
Programs excluded from the accreditation review as described in the eligibility section of the accreditation standards (2013 business accreditation standards and 2018 accounting accreditation standards) and within the 2020 business accreditation standards, the programmatic scope and the exclusion of program(s) information can be found under the Philosophy of AACSB Accreditation.
Background information provided by the applicant, which can be up to five pages in length, including a list of self-proposed effective practices.
Final Self-Evaluation Report (SER)
Report submitted to the peer review team detailing how the applicant meets the standards for accreditation by AACSB.
Additional review for up to two years beyond the continuous improvement review 2.
Focused Review Team
Mutually agreed-upon team consisting of one member from the continuous improvement review 2 peer review team and one from (or appointed by) the relevant accreditation committee. The focused review team evaluates progress and resolution of specific standards-related quality items identified by the continuous improvement review 2 visit report.
A systematic analysis of the applicant's strengths and weaknesses relative to each of the AACSB accreditation standards and relative to the applicant's unique mission and strategic management objectives.
Accreditation is granted for a five-year period, after which schools enter the Continuous Improvement Review phase.
Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC)
Oversees the initial accreditation process, which includes review of the eligibility applications for business accreditation, self-evaluation reports, initial accreditation team report, and assignment of the mentor and the initial accreditation peer review team.
Initial Accreditation Visit—Letter of Application
Application submitted to AACSB for an initial accreditation visit.
Initial Self-Evaluation Report (iSER)
A plan that establishes the agenda for meeting the AACSB accreditation standards and achieving the mission and objectives of the applicant seeking accreditation.
AACSB accreditation is granted by default to the institution. In this case, all the institution’s business and management programs are included in the scope of the AACSB accreditation review.
Individual assigned to assist an applicant during the initial accreditation process. The mentor reviews the eligibility application, facilitates development of the initial self-evaluation report (iSER), and provides comments and recommendations to the Initial Accreditation Committee (or Accounting Accreditation Committee).
Mentor iSER Review Report and Recommendation (Initial Accreditation)
Mentor recommendation to the Initial Accreditation Committee (IAC). The mentor can recommend acceptance or non-acceptance of the iSER by the Initial (or Accounting) Accreditation Committee. The mentor recommendation consists of a written report in the form of the iSER review template.
Mentor Visit Report
A summary report drafted by the mentor following 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.
The myAccreditation platform is under currently development and is being rolled out to our members in phases. The system is a secure platform for AACSB-accredited organizations or those pursuing AACSB accreditation to submit and manage their documents and applications electronically. For questions about myAccreditation, please contact us at [email protected]
Peer Review Team (PRT)
The accreditation visit 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
Individual who chairs the continuous improvement review or initial accreditation visit and coordinates with the school on their report and visit logistics.
Letter written by the initial accreditation peer review team to applicant school based on the final self-evaluation report recommending whether a visit should take place. If the visit is to take place, the letter typically requests the school to provide additional information either prior to the visit or during the visit. The pre-visit analysis includes a standard-by-standard review of the final self-evaluation report.
Report submitted to the relevant accreditation committee for review of the school’s progress toward meeting the self-reported objectives documented in the iSER.
Revocation of Accreditation
Loss of membership in the Accreditation Council.
Scope of Accreditation
The degree programs that are included in the accreditation review.
A systematic analysis of the school’s mission, faculty, students, curriculum, instructional resources, operations, intellectual contributions, and processes, which provides the basis upon which a realistic and comprehensive self-evaluation report can be developed.
Strategic Management Plan
The systematic planning and implementation for the prioritized use of resources to accomplish the stated mission.
Changes that affect mission and supporting strategic directions along with the subsequent effects on programs, participants, and/or resources that are of vital interest to AACSB, given the potential to impact quality and alignment with AACSB standards. Schools report changes for committee review and consultative feedback.
Unit of Accreditation
In contrast to institutional accreditation, schools may apply for AACSB accreditation as a single academic unit within a larger institution offering business degree programs. In this case, only the approved unit’s business programs are included in the scope of the accreditation review.
Unit of Accreditation Application
Application submitted to the appropriate accreditation committee to establish whether the applicant meets the criteria to be eligible to be considered as the unit of accreditation by AACSB.
Withdrawal of Application by Applicant
Action available to applicants 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.