Courtesy of GW Media Relations
Updated: June 13, 2014 at 10:58 a.m.
When Linda Livingstone starts her deanship this summer, she will prepare to guide officials and faculty through a review by the business school’s accreditor as it takes a closer look at academic quality in the college.
Livingstone, who the University named the school’s leader last month, will take the helm as it prepares for a follow-up review from its accreditor. Those officials were so concerned about certain issues, such as faculty qualifications, when they visited campus in February that they chose to add an extra layer of evaluation before deciding GW’s long-term status.
She brings inside knowledge of the accrediting body, the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, after spending a year on the organization’s board. That experience will help the school prepare for the review this coming year, professors said.
The sixth-year review could include a campus visit, but Dustin Carnevale, a spokesman for the school, said the organization has not determined whether it will include a site visit.
The incoming dean will become chair of the board of directors next month, making her the face of the organization that is widely considered the gold standard in business school accreditation. Her role in the board, which will extend at least one year beyond her tenure as chair, could put her in a conflict of interest if next year’s review goes poorly.
Livingstone would not be included in AACSB’s conversations and votes about GW, and the University’s case would only reach the board if it failed this year’s check-in and went through a committee review.
Livingstone did not respond to specific questions about next year’s accreditation review. Prabir Bagchi, a longtime professor of operations and supply chain management, said her familiarity with the organization’s inner workings might not be enough to keep the school’s accreditation safe.
“She has hard work cut out for her,” said Bagchi, who served as senior associate dean from 2004 until 2009.
The school’s next steps
Several professors said teaching qualifications was the group’s top concern. The AACSB cannot comment on specific schools’ cases or exactly why it decided a sixth-year review was necessary.
Barb Higel, a manager of accreditation services for the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions at AACSB, said reviews for schools across the country serve as the first step toward working out glaring problems.
“It really goes back to the standards,” Higel said about colleges undergoing a sixth-year review. “Are they meeting the standards? With continuous improvement review, the school is addressing the concerns and issues presented from the last visit.”
Higel said a few schools across the country host additional reviews every year, though she declined to provide a specific number. The majority of universities address the issues that accreditors highlight and earn re-accreditation.
But professors at GW said they doubted whether problems such as lackluster teaching standards could be so easily and quickly fixed. Bagchi said raising faculty qualifications to AACSB standards would be tricky for professors who are already hired.
One professor with knowledge of the review committee’s findings said the school’s lack of a permanent dean hurt its chances.
“A permanent sitting dean would have been able to say that we would fix it, consequently making it an item for future improvement,” said the professor, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Carnevale said the peer review team had presented questions that will require further explanation next year.
“During the coming months, we will position ourselves to address the questions presented and provide evidence that the necessary modifications have been made,” he said in an email.
Livingstone and Provost Steven Lerman declined to answer specific questions about the upcoming review through a spokesperson because only current members of the business school’s dean’s office can comment on accreditation. Interim Dean Christopher Kayes has declined multiple requests to answer questions or sit for an interview to discuss accreditation.
Initial fears realized
When then-dean Doug Guthrie was suddenly