Credential evaluation procedure 2

Ross Woods, Rev. 2020

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

CredEval may accept a student’s qualifications or any part of a qualification that was officially or partially granted by an acceptable foreign institution. However, Instititutions also reserve the right not to accept any foreign qualification or transcript for recognition.

Purpose

The purpose of evaluations of foreign qualifications and credit is to give recommendations on recognition. This is not the same as evaluation for credit. (See above.)

General guidelines

1. Publish standardized information on the procedures and criteria for the assessment of foreign qualifications.
2. Inform prospective applicants for recognition of foreign qualifications of at least the following:
1. The documentation required, including requirements as to the authentication and translation of documents; a description of the assessment process; and a description of the assessment criteria.
2. The status of recognition statements and the time needed to process an application.
3. Any fees charged.
4. A reference to the national laws and international conventions and agreements that may be relevant to the assessment of foreign qualifications.
5. The conditions and procedures for appealing against a recognition decision.
6. If you give applicants typical recognition cases, explain clearly that assessments are individualized and applicants cannot infer their own outcomes from the examples.
3. Procedures and criteria should be transparent, coherent and reliable. To avoid confusion, instructions for students must be written in language that they can easily understand, using terminology that is familiar to them. They might also need a transcript request form that they can use to have their documents sent by their home institutions.
4. Periodically review your particular procedure to keep it up-to-date, increase transparency, and minimize complications.
5. The grant of partial or conditional recognition does not imply an automatic right to admission to any courses designed to help applicants remedy deficiencies with a view to gain recognition.
6. Applications should be processed as promptly as possible, and the time of processing should ideally not exceed four months.
7. Give advice in the best interests of applicants.
8. The responsibility for providing information on the qualification for which recognition is sought is shared by:
   1. Applicants
   2. Graduate institutions at which the qualifications in question were awarded

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.

Processing Applications

1. Acknowledge receipt of the application.
2. Tell applicants how long the process may take from the time all necessary documentation have been received.
3. Process the application as promptly as possible, ideally within 4 months.
4. 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.
5. If your decision 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.
6. Students need to be informed that they have the right to appeal if they disagree with the outcome of the assessment.

Verification Procedure: Simple cases

1. The Admissions Officer requests an official transcript directly from the issuing institution in a foreign country. The mode of delivery should ideally be by an approved electronic means. An official transcript must bear the appropriate signatures and seal of the institution that issued it.
2. The Admissions Officer checks that:
   1. the transcript is authentic
   2. the transcript can be considered to be official
   3. the foreign institution actually exists
   4. the foreign institution is recognized or accredited in its home country
   5. the institution offers the program that is indicated on the document
   6. the candidate’s educational chronology supports the credential in question
3. In cases where documents do not come directly from the institution or cannot be verified as authentic copies of the documents submitted by the student, the Admissions Officer should:
   1. Send the relevant documents for verification to the institution that issued them.
   2. Verification requests should be sent to the official address of the institution.
   3. Before sending a document for verification, it is important to check the address to ensure that it is the same as the one that appears in published sources and not rely solely on the address that is printed on the document itself.
   4. Letters asking for verification should be addressed to the title of the officer who issued and signed the document (e.g., "Controller of Examinations", "Director of Studies", or "Registrar") and not to a particular individual.
4. In some cases, the Admissions Officer should ask a local coordinator for assistance. This may be helpful in cases where institutions have distinct procedures, for example:
• Their normal procedure is to validate or notarize a photocopy.
• Documents are not available in a reasonable timeframe. Some reputable institutions cannot efficiently authenticate their own transcripts.
• Direct contact from a distance is not possible; they only respond to in-person queries.
• Fraudulent documentation is easy to acquire, even from official sources.
• Documents are available only by paying an unrealistic fee or a bribe.
5. Where possible, documents must be verified as authentic by authorized officials at the institutions that issued them. Verifications issued by embassies, consulates, public notaries or other officials that are outside of the academic institution are not acceptable.
6. To speed the verification of documents, the request and documents should be sent by email. Replies by fax or email are acceptable, provided that the name, email address, or fax number of the sender can be traced back to the institution's website or in a published authoritative reference.
7. In countries where institutions issue transcripts in languages other than English, a specific request should be made to that institution to issue a translated transcript in English. Prospective students should further be required to have their official transcripts issued in English by the institutions that they attended. Not only is it more economical for the students to obtain their documents in English from their institutions, the translation is likely to be more accurate as well.

Verification Procedure: Complex cases

1. Check whether there is sufficient information on the educational practices of the country of origin to make a judgment.
2. Check whether the issuing institution is listed in the International Handbook of Universities (IHU) www.whed.net . If the degree or transcript is authenticated and the issuing institution is listed in IHU, then recommend that it be recognized as accredited. (EDGE on the AACRAO website https://www.aacrao.org no longer has any free access so is unsuitable for occasional use.)
3. If the issuing institution is not listed in IHU, then check it in EDGE on the AACRAO website. If the degree or transcript is authenticated and the issuing institution is listed in EDGE, then recommend that it be recognized as accredited.
4. If the issuing institution is not listed on either IHU or EDGE, then check its bona fides through local referees and the local country coordinator.
   1. Many countries have no governmental provision for accrediting private theological schools. If a degree or transcript is authenticated and the issuing institution is recognized by a suitable agency (e.g., a WEF accreditor), then recommend that it is recognized.
   2. Some governments have accreditors other than the department of higher education. These multiple accreditation systems might work in equivalent but different ways. When transcripts and qualifications are earned with other government accreditors, recommend that they be recognized.
5. Add any lessons learned to the country profile for future reference and to keep all practices consistent.

Evaluation criteria

1. Consider the status of the graduate institution that awarded the qualification. Is it part of a graduate education system from a country that is part of the Lisbon Recognition Convention and/or belonging to the European Region?
   1. If the country has established a quality assurance system, including a system of formal assessment of their graduate education institutions, consider the results of the process when evaluating their qualifications.
   2. 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.
   3. What is the qualification’s relative position and function compared to other qualifications in the same system?
   4. Can you refer to the National Qualifications Framework, European Qualifications Frameworks, or other similar Qualification Frameworks?
   5. Other: If it was issued by an institution established through transnational arrangements, you should 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.
2. 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, but might also include transfer credit. Examples of other assessment purposes are:
   1. General access to graduate education.
   2. Restricted access to graduate education (i.e. access restricted to certain parts of the graduate education system).
   3. General access to further studies at a given level.
   4. Restricted access to further studies.
   5. Access to professional training.
   6. General access to the labor market (i.e., as a qualification for a wide range of positions at a given level).
   7. Access to a specialized area of the labor market.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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. For two qualifications to be equivalent, they do not need to be the same.
6. Give recognition unless you can show that the applicant’s qualification is substantially different from an accredited USA qualification for the purpose of the recognition.
7. You should only reject recognition outright when you cannot grant even an alternative form of recognition. In some cases, the absence of recognition may be "fair recognition" on the evidence of the case.
8. If the differences are substantial, determine whether you can give alternative, partial and/or conditional recognition, 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 of the foreign qualification.
   3. Full or partial recognition of the foreign qualification subject to the applicant successfully taking additional examinations, further study, aptitude tests, or other compensatory measures.
   4. Full or partial recognition of the foreign qualification at the end of a probationary period, possibly subject to specified conditions.
9. When comparing qualifications, consider only the comparability of outcomes and access to further activities. Don’t just look at program elements as a necessary condition for recognition in their own right.
10. While you should assess qualifications in qualitative terms, you may have to also use quantitative criteria, but only if they are relevant to quality and may supplement qualitative criteria.
11. 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.
12. The recognition of qualifications issued several years ago and/or under previous graduate education structures may present different challenges. Consider the following:
    1. To what extent is the qualification 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.
    3. If a national qualifications framework exists in the issuing country, it should be established whether previous qualifications are included in it.
    4. 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.
13. 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 graduate 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.
14. 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.
15. In cases where refugees, persons in a refugee-like situation, or others who for good reason cannot document the qualifications they claim, you should create and use a "background paper" giving an overview of the qualifications or periods of study claimed with all available documents and supporting evidence.
16. 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.

The evaluation outcome

1. The outcome of the evaluation of a foreign qualification may take the form of:
   1. A recognition decision.
   2. Advice to another institution, which will then make the recognition decision.
   3. A statement to the applicant or to whom it may concern (e.g. current or prospective employers, graduate education institutions, etc.) providing a comparison of the foreign qualification with similar qualifications in the country in which recognition is sought, without being a formal recognition decision.
   4. Any other advice given to the applicant.
2. Examples of suitable evaluation outcomes can include:
   1. Acceptance of the qualification or transcript, stating that the institution should be recognized, and giving the basis for recognition.
   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.
3. Applicants should be informed of the status of the assessment they receive.
4. Applicants should be informed of their right to appeal if they disagree with the outcome of the assessment.
5. If recognition cannot be granted according to applicants’ requests, they should be helped to identify remedial measures that might help them get recognition at a later stage.

Appeal procedure

1. Appeals against an assessment outcome must be in writing and addressed to 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 deemed to warrant a new assessment and will not be treated as an appeal.
5. 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.