Credential evaluation procedure 1

Ross Woods, Rev. 2020

This is a procedure based on the The Lisbon Recognition Convention. The term for the credential evaluator is CredEval.

It complies with the Revised Recommendation on Criteria and Procedures for the Assessment of Foreign Qualifications, adopted by the Lisbon Recognition Convention Committee, 23rd June 2010, UNESCO Division of Higher Education. See http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/highereducation/recognition/lrc_EN.asp

DETC Compliance requirement: "Transcripts not in English must be evaluated by an appropriate third party and translated into English or a trained transcript evaluator fluent in the language on the transcript. In this case, the evaluator must have expertise in the educational practices of the country of origin and include an English translation of the review." (DEAC Accreditation Handbook 2017, p. 89.)

 

Assessing foreign qualifications

• Recognition of Non-US transcripts: Agreements in place
• Credential evaluation procedure of other non-US degrees and transcripts
• General procedures
• General principles of evaluation
• Preparation
• Appeals
• Translations
• Refugees and persons in refugee-like situations
• Supplementary notes

 

Recognition of Non-US transcripts: Agreements in place

1. CredEval automatically recognizes the transcripts and qualifications of foreign organizations that have a recognition agreement in place, the institution will provide and authenticate a copy of the transcript directly to CredEval.

 

Recognition of Non-US transcripts: All other cases

Providing documents for credential evaluation (Other non-US degrees and transcripts)

1. The prospective student sends the CredEval contact person a copy of his/her transcript or qualification and proof of identity.
2. The CredEval contact will:
   1. check the authenticity of the transcript or qualification with the issuing institution by email or telephone and make a written record.
3. Establish that the documents are genuine:
   1. Were they issued by the institution indicated in the document?
   2. Have they subsequently been unlawfully altered?
   3. Were they in fact rightfully issued to the applicant?
4. Authentication should not excessively burden applicants. Assess the risk, and only require extra evidence if you suspect forgery.
5. Certified photocopies of official documents are usually sufficient, but you can require the original documents if you need to check for forgery. Do not require the full legalization of all documents.
6. If the applicant has good reason for being unable to document their claimed qualifications (e.g. refugee, displaced person) refer them for Assessment of Current Competencies. You may also compile a background paper if you have sufficient information. (See below.)
7. Provide a certified true translation into English of the transcript or qualification.
8. Send documents to the CredEval Admissions Officer.

 

Credential evaluation procedure of other non-US degrees and transcripts

1. The CredEval Admissions Officer carries out the evaluation procedure.
   1. Advise prospective applicants about the possibilities and procedures for formally applying for assessment of their qualifications.
2. Acknowledge receipt of the application.
   1. Inform them of any fees.
   2. Send the applicant a copy of this procedure, or indicate where it is available on a website.
   3. Tell applicants how long the assessment will take from the time you have received all necessary documentation.
   4. Tell them that they can appeal if they have reason to disagree with the assessment result.
3. When the documentation arrives
   1. Process the application as promptly as possible, normally within four months.
   2. If there is a delay, inform the applicant of the delay, the reasons for the delay, and a new date when a decision can be expected.
4. Check whether he/she has sufficient information available on the educational practices of the country of origin to make a judgement.
5. Consider other policy parameters (e.g. age of transcript, limits of transfer credit). If any anomalies arise (e.g. need for extra evidence) then a re-assessment may be required.
6. Check whether the issuing institution is listed in the International Handbook of Universities (IHU) www.whed.net (EDGE on the AACRAO website https://www.aacrao.org no longer has any free access so is unsuitable for occasional use.)
   1. If the issuing institution is listed on either IHU or EDGE, then accept the degree or transcript as accredited.
   2. If the issuing institution is not listed on either IHU or EDGE, then check its bona fides through local referees.
   3. If the issuing institution is recognized by a suitable agency (e.g. a WEF accreditor), then recommend that it be recognized.
   4. Whether or not the instituion is formally recognized, consider the evaluation criteria further below.
7. Issue a formal letter with one of the following decisions:
   1. Acceptance of the qualification or transcript, stating its accreditation status and and giving the basis for recognition (e.g. reference to source).
   2. Non-acceptance of the qualification or transcript, stating that there is no basis for recognition. Unacceptable accreditation should also be listed, and the reason for non-acceptance.
8. If you cannot grant the recognition requested by the applicant, consider giving alternative or partial recognition where possible, for example:
   1. recognition of the foreign qualification as comparable to a qualification of the host country, but not to that indicated by the applicant;
   2. partial recognition;
   3. full or partial recognition subject to the applicant successfully taking additional examinations, further aptitude tests or other compensatory measures;
   4. full or partial recognition of the foreign qualification at the end of a probationary period.
   5. refer the student to the AAC process for assessment.
   6. Note: The grant of partial or conditional recognition or recognition does not imply an automatic right to admission to any courses.
9. Write in the recognition statement the purpose(s) for which the statement is valid.
10. If recognition is different from the recognition requested by the applicant (including cases where no form of recognition is possible), inform the applicant of the reasons for your decision and his or her possibilities for appealing against it.
11. If you cannot grant the recognition requested by the applicant, provide any advice, including remedial measures that will help them get recognition at a later stage.
12. If the degree or transcript cannot be recognized at all, then issue a letter stating that there is no basis for recognition and give the reason.
13. Add any lessons learned to a formal database of recognition practices.

 

Notes:

1. CredEval may use the services of its local contact persons to translate and authenticate local qualifications, unless there is a conflict of interest.
2. Many countries have no governmental provision for accrediting private theological schools.
3. Some countries have multiple accreditation systems that work in equivalent but different ways.
4. Some reputable institutions cannot efficiently authenticate their own transcripts.
5. Some reputable institutions cannot efficiently authenticate their own transcripts.
6. CredEval does not give assessments for access to regulated professions or to meet US immigration requirements.

 

General procedures

1. Procedures and criteria should be transparent, coherent and reliable.
2. Publish standardized information on the procedures and criteria for the assessment of foreign higher education qualifications.
3. Inform prospective evaluees of at least the following:
   1. the documentation required, including requirements as to the authentication and translation of documents
   2. a description of the assessment process
   3. a description of the assessment criteria
   4. the status of recognition statements
   5. the time needed to process an application
   6. any fees charged
   7. a reference to the national laws and international conventions and agreements that may be relevant to the assessment of foreign qualifications
   8. the conditions and procedures for appealing against a recognition decision.
   9. If you give applicants typical recognition cases, explain clearly that assessments are individualized and applicants cannot infer their own outcomes from the examples.
4. Maintain a file on each country
   1. Main notes on the accreditation and recognition systems
   2. Maintain an updated white list of approved instituion. You may publish it if you wish.
   3. You may keep a black list of unacceptable institutions and accreditors, but it must be confidential. (Publication would bring a risk of litgation.)
5. Periodic review
   1. Update the procedure to increase transparency and minimize complications.
   2. Update white lists and black lists
6. Give advice in the best interests of applicants.
7. The responsibility for providing information on the qualification for which recognition is sought is shared by:
   1. applicants,
   2. the institutions at which the qualifications in question were awarded and
   3. you as the assessor
8. Process applications should be as promptly as possible. In any case processing times should not exceed four months.

 

General principles of evaluation

1. While you should assess qualifications in qualitative terms, you might have to also use quantitative criteria, but only if they are relevant to quality and may supplement qualitative criteria.
2. If learning outcomes are clearly documented, take them into consideration.
3. For two qualifications to be equivalent, they do not need to be the same.
4. Consider the status of the higher education institution that awarded the qualification.Is it part of a higher education system from a country that is part of the Lisbon Recognition Convention and/or belonging to the European Region?
5. If the country has established a quality assurance system including a system of formal assessment of their higher education institutions, consider the results of the process when evaluating their qualifications.
6. If it was issued by an institution established through transnational arrangements, analyze these arrangements on the basis of the principles stipulated in the UNESCO/Council of Europe Code of Good Practice in the Provision of Transnational Education and in the Recommendation on the Recognition of Joint Degrees.
7. Consider the purpose(s) for which recognition is sought, and write in the recognition statement the purpose(s) for which the statement is valid. In this case, it is for admission to studies of CredEval or advanced placement through transfer credit. Examples of other assessment purposes are:
   1. restricted access to higher education (i.e. access restricted to certain parts of the higher education system;
   2. restricted access to further studies;
   3. access to professional training;
   4. general access to the labor market (i.e. as a qualification for a wide range of positions at a given level);
   5. access to a specialized area of the labor market;
8. Consider any particular national and international legal texts relevant to the case. They might determine the procedure you must follow or pre-determine the outcome.
9. Consider past practice in similar recognition cases, in order to ensure consistency in recognition practice. Past practice should be a guide, and any substantial change of practice should be justified.
10. Identify the qualification in the system of the country in which recognition is sought that is most comparable to the foreign qualification, considering also the purpose for which recognition is sought.
11. What is the qualification’s position relative position and function compared to other qualifications in the same system?
12. If possible, refer to the National Qualifications Framework, European Qualifications Frameworks and other similar Qualification Frameworks
13. Qualifications of approximately equal level may show differences in terms of content, profile, workload, quality and learning outcomes. Be flexible in assessing foreign qualifications; only substantial differences in view of the purpose for which recognition is sought (e.g. academic or de facto professional recognition) should lead to partial recognition or non-recognition of the foreign qualifications.
14. Give recognition unless you can show that difference from a US qualification is substantial for the purpose of the recognition. If the differences are substantial, you might be able to give alternative, partial and/or conditional recognition.
15. When comparing qualifications, consider only the comparability of outcomes and access to further activities. Do not look only at program elements as a necessary condition for recognition in their own right.
16. If formal rights attach to a certain foreign qualification in the home country, evaluate it with a view to giving the holder comparable formal rights in the host country.
17. The recognition of qualifications issued several years ago and/or under previous higher education structures can present different challenges. Consider the following:
    1. To what extent is the qualification is outdated? This will depend on the field concerned as well as the applicant’s activities since getting it.
    2. If the qualification was issued under previous structures, refer to the status of the qualification in the issuing country. If a national qualifications framework exists in the issuing country, it should be established whether previous qualifications are included in it.
    3. In general, older qualifications should be recognized along the same lines as similar qualifications issued in the country in which recognition is sought, and taking into account the purpose for which recognition is sought.
18. Focus on the learning outcomes, as well as the quality of the program. Its duration is merely one indication of the level of achievement reached at the end of the program. Acknowledge that recognition of prior learning, credit transfer, different forms of access to higher education, joint degrees and life-long learning will all shorten the duration of some academic qualifications without diminishing the learning outcomes. A decision not to grant recognition should not be motivated by duration alone.
19. The assessment of a foreign qualification should focus on the qualification for which recognition is sought. Previous levels of education should be considered only where these levels have a serious bearing on the outcome of the assessment and should, as far as possible, be limited to qualifications of a level immediately preceding the qualification for which recognition is sought.
20. Apply your know-how and best professional skills, and take note of all relevant published information. Where adequate information on the learning outcomes is available, this takes precedence in the assessment over consideration of the education program that has led to the qualification.

 

Preparation

1. Draw up an inventory of typical recognition cases and/or a comparative overview of other education systems or qualifications in relation to that of the US as an aid in making consistent recognition decisions.
2. Consider whether you can make this information available to applicants. If so, tell them that it is only an indicative guide, and that each application will be assessed on an individual basis.

 

Appeals

1. Applicants who disagree with an assessment outcome may appeal as follows:
   1. Appeals must in writing and addressed to the President of CredEval, sent no more than two months after the assessment outcome was sent.
   2. The appeal must contain adequate identifying information of the appellant, and the reasons for the appeal
   3. The appellant may supply any further evidence relevant to the original assessment. This may only be of clarifying nature to the original evidence submitted.
   4. Submission of evidence dating from after the original assessment will be deems to warrant a new assessment and will not be treated as an appeal.
2. Within one month of the receipt of all documents relating to the appeal, the assessor’s supervisor will review the assessment and given a written appeal outcome and the reasons for the appeal outcome.

 

Translations

1. Decide which documents need to be translated into English. (For example, if you have staff fluent in a particular language, you might not need a translation.)
2. Decide whether you need a sworn translator.
3. As a rule, titles of foreign qualifications should be provided in the original language, without translation, However, you may transliterate them (i.e. reproduce the sounds rendered by one alphabet or writing system in the English alphabet).
4. Degree titles of similar names do not necessarily refer to the same level.

 

Refugees and persons in refugee-like situations

In cases where refugees, persons in a refugee-like situation or others for good reason cannot document the qualifications they claim, create and use a "background paper" giving an overview of the qualifications or periods of study claimed with all available documents and supporting evidence.

The "background paper" is intended to be a tool to reconstruct the educational background of those who cannot document their qualifications. The purpose is to affirm their academic achievements towards other evaluating bodies, like universities and employers, in order to gain access to further studies or appropriate employment.

The "background paper" itself is not an assessment, but an authoritative description or reconstruction of the academic achievements linked to the available documents and supporting evidence.

The "background paper" is:

• an overview of the claimed educational background with the available documents and supporting evidence
• a checklist, based upon the model of the Diploma Supplement, used by the competent recognition authorities to add more relevant information

Example of overview

1. Identifying information
2. Educational Background
3. Qualification
4. Evidence
5. Secondary education
6. Diploma
7. Higher education-first degree
8. Student ID
9. Transcript of 1st year
10. Higher education-second degree
11. No educational documents, but teacher statement
12. Employment contract
13. Proof of informal and non-formal learning

 

Supplementary notes

There is an inherent dilemma in specifying criteria for the assessment of foreign qualifications. While the aim of an assessment is to assess the foreign qualification in qualitative terms, you need to some extent rely on both qualitative and quantitative criteria. It is, however, important that the criteria used be chosen because of their suitability in indicating the quality of the qualification in question and the applicant's ability to undertake the activity for which recognition is sought (e.g. further study, research, gainful employment).

For example, students who have obtained good study results (grades) may be considered to have considerable potential for learning and personal development, even if the qualifications for which they seek recognition have been earned in an education system or at an institution which is considered to be of substantially lower quality than the education system of the host country. In this case, the result of the assessment may depend on whether recognition is sought for the purpose of further study or for the purpose of entry into the labor market. In the former case, it may be easier to recognize the qualifications, since the applicants may be expected to improve their qualifications and reach their true potential in the course of further study. In the latter case, it may be more difficult to grant recognition, since the qualifications will be the basis for an activity which may have a direct impact on other citizens, and since there is no guarantee that the qualifications will be improved in the course of the exercise of this activity in the labor market. For the latter form of recognition, the duration and content of practice periods may also be of importance.

In no case should a recognition decision be based on only quantitative criteria, such as length of study, without some attempt being made to assess the quality of applicants' learning outcomes and qualifications. Learning outcomes emphasize the results of learning rather than focusing on inputs such as length of study. The time required for the average learner or typical student to achieve the learning outcomes is decided not only by the volume of knowledge and skills to be taught and learned but also by the context in which the process of learning takes place. To an extent, substantial differences according to quantitative criteria may, however, be taken as an indication element of a difference in quality.