In the latest update from SAPC…
“The Appeals Committee appointed by SACS notified us that our appeal to overturn its June decision has been denied. In response, a lawsuit was filed in federal court in the Middle District of North Carolina asking for the decision to be reversed. Federal District Court Judge Carlton Tilley has set Wednesday, Aug. 29 as the date to hear and rule on our Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. Throughout this legal process, the College remains accreditated and our students are eligible to participate in all federal financial aid programs.”
My own response to SACS:
What a waste. I just read Southern Association of Colleges and School’s (SACS) public notice on the outcome of St. Andrews Presbyterian College’s (SAPC) appeal. I see the document as little more than a perfunctory defense response in a predetermined strategy to save face. In my opinion, the document does not qualify as anything specifically relating to St. Andrews’ appeal of the SACS committee’s to revoke the school’s accreditation; instead, it speaks in defense of SACS appeals procedure and policy.
This 24 August 2007 document briefly outlines the grounds for appeal: 1) the institution (that would be SAPC) must show that the committee failed to follow procedures; and/or 2) the committee’s decision was arbitrary. It also says the burden of proof is the responsibility of the institution. In short, it states that SACS’s ”decision regarding the College’s ongoing membership was neither arbitrary or unreasonable.” It also notes that SAPC had “failed to document compliance with several of the Commission’s standards” back in June of this year.
So, excuse me for being dumb, but was this “hearing” for the benefit of SAPC or the benefit of SACS? It seems to me that SACS is more concerned with justifying their own actions rather than allowing a second look at the real issue. I believe SAPC is entitled to the benefit of re-examination, especially considering the gravity of this situation and the most recent positive developments as well as any ensuing legal action. And what about the school’s academic merit, its national rankings, and its unique and exceptional programs?What about the supporting opinions of leaders in higher education policy and organizations?
This is what Chalicechick says:
“The administrative hearing is a farce and despite the face that the ‘Drew is in 7 million dollars worth of better shape than they were when this began, SACS is very unlikely to decide against itself.
After that, though, we go to court and SACS has, according to an unverified but typically reliable source, NEVER won one of these things in court. “
When this is all over, I sincerely hope higher education policy makers consider what happened here and push for needed changes. On the up side, I believe SAPC can take the heat and will eventually prevail.
Monday 27 August 2007 at 12:34 pm
We all all hope that SAPC’s legal team can present a compelling reason for a Federal Judge to force SACS to review SAPC in its current condition, and give the institution a final chance to comply. Because of the lack of transparency to the core issues and documents on both sides it is difficult for any of us on the outside to see the nitty gritty details and draw fair conclusions. In any case, I believe this situation may well prompt a review of the responsibilities and the administrative procedures of SACS. I would have liked to see documentation of SACS showing how they are taking some positive initiatives to help institutions back into compliance rather then posturing themselves as a ferocious guard dog. Hopefully SACS will get the restraining order and itself and the surrounding community will not become collateral damage in a larger problem.
Monday 27 August 2007 at 1:54 pm
Opps…. last sentence should have said “SAPC will get the restraining order”
I got lost in the acronyms.
Monday 27 August 2007 at 2:13 pm
Jan, thanks for your comments.
Have you read ACTA’s “Why Accreditation Doesn’t Work and What Policymakers Can Do About It”? (http://www.goacta.org/publications/reports.html)
wml
Monday 27 August 2007 at 3:04 pm
I have. But what does i take to get actually get reform started. hopefully not SAPC.
Monday 27 August 2007 at 10:02 pm
As much as I hate to see SAPC going through all this, I believe their legal action could drawn some much needed attention to the accreditation process and standards–especially the process.
wml
Friday 31 August 2007 at 12:01 am
Please read the latest update:
President’s Letter
With the agreement of the parties, Federal District Court Judge Carlton Tilley of the Middle District of North Carolina today ordered St. Andrews reinstated into full membership into the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) until further order of the court. This action by the parties and Judge Tilley means our college will continue to be accredited as the case continues in Federal Court. Importantly and as specified in the order, St. Andrews students remain eligible to receive state and federal financial aid and full credit for their course of work.
This shall remain in full force and effect until further order of the judge.
As dates and deadlines are set by Judge Tilley, you will be kept informed about the progress of the lawsuit. We will provide information as we know. It is impossible to adequately express my sincere appreciation to each of you for your support and understanding. You are what makes St. Andrews such a unique and special place.
Paul Baldasare
President
Friday 31 August 2007 at 12:03 am
Keep the vigil!
Friday 31 August 2007 at 1:45 am
Thanks for your posts.
wml
Thursday 20 December 2007 at 10:36 am
I would like to see a continuation of the topic