Considering the need for organizational resilience at hispanic serving institutions: a study of how administrators navigate institutional accreditation in Southern states

Abstract

Prior literature on resilience in the Latina and Latino community focuses on student resilience. In this paper we argue that it is also important to consider organizational resilience among the colleges and universities that enroll large percentages of Latina and Latino students. Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) often come under undue public scrutiny, sometimes inadvertently, when policymakers evaluate MSIs using the same standards that they use for more homogeneous institutions. In this multiple case study, we consider how structures and practices can support organizational resilience across different types of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs). Because prior research suggests that MSIs are disproportionately subjected to adverse actions from institutional accreditors, we focus on studying organizational resilience within the context of the institutional accreditation process. Consistent with theory on organizational resilience, we find that the structures and practices that supported organizational resilience resulted from relatively ordinary adaptive processes. We discuss implications for theory and practice.

Keywords:

• Minority serving institution
• organizational resilience
• accreditation
• Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS)
• higher education

Notes

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

This study is part of a larger project that was supported by a grant from the New Faculty Research Program at University of Houston.

Notes

1 In Foucault (1977) words, ‘the definition of offences and their prosecution are carried out in turn in order to maintain the punitive mechanisms and their functions.’ (p. 24).

2 For example, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) had an unwritten policy that excluded HBCUs from receiving regional accreditation between the late 19th century until as recently as 1957 (Asgill, 1976).

3 In other words, this is not a review of empirical research, rather it is our interpretation of legal scholarship that provides guidance to college and university attorneys and administrators about their obligations and the ways they should comply with the accreditation system. This section provides context for our premise that colleges and universities need organizational resilience to negotiate the accreditation process. We acknowledge that “discourse analysis informed by Foucauldian or other poststructural theory endeavours to avoid the substitution of one ‘truth’ for another” and recognize “that the reader has ultimate authority over interpretation and therefore meaning—not, in fact, the author” (Graham, 2011, pp. 665–666). Readers may question our characterization of the pressures of the institutional accreditation process; nevertheless, we proceed to offer a critical perspective of how written opinions from federal courts added power dynamics to the accreditation process that it was not meant to have as a voluntary association dedicated to continuous improvement.

4 The current name of the agency that accredits colleges and universities within the region is the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (often abbreviated SACSCOC). We use SACS throughout the paper given the agency’s origins.

5 Legal scholar Judith Areen aptly described this pivotal moment: ‘The power to recognize, of course, contains the power to control’ (2011, pp. 1483-1484).

6 The eleven states are: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia. See http://sacscoc.org/.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Frank Fernandez

Frank Fernandez is Assistant Professor of Higher Education at The University of Mississippi; he writes about educational policy and equity issues.

Christopher A. Burnett

Christopher Burnett earned a Ph.D. in Higher Education Leadership and Policy Studies at University of Houston; he studies policy and accountability issues, including the importance of institutional planning, effectiveness, and research.