Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mixed-methods analysis reveals high accreditation readiness and satisfaction in stakeholders, suggesting improvements are needed.
Accreditation serves as a critical mechanism for ensuring quality assurance, institutional credibility, and continuous improvement in higher education. This study examined accreditation readiness, stakeholder satisfaction, and the challenges experienced by a higher education institution in the Philippines using a convergent parallel mixed-methods design. Quantitative data were collected from 525 administrators, faculty, staff, and students through a validated questionnaire, while qualitative insights were derived from open-ended responses and analyzed thematically. Findings indicated a high level of accreditation readiness (M = 4.23) and stakeholder satisfaction (M = 4.30), with administrators reporting the most favorable perceptions. Challenges were rated moderately high (M = 3.64), particularly concerning administrative support, resource limitations, and time constraints. ANOVA results showed no significant differences in perceptions among stakeholder groups, suggesting shared institutional experiences. A strong positive correlation was found between readiness and satisfaction (r = .894), while readiness and challenges showed a negligible correlation (r = .133). Thematic analysis revealed four key themes: institutional proactivity, operational barriers, integrated support systems, and empowered teamwork. These highlight the need for early preparation, collaborative engagement, consistent documentation, and psychological readiness among stakeholders. This study addresses a research gap by offering a stakeholder-centered perspective on accreditation in the Philippine context. It underscores the need for strategic improvements in documentation, communication, digital infrastructure, and capacity-building initiatives. An action plan is proposed to guide institutions in strengthening their accreditation efforts through inclusive, coordinated, and sustainable practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Montano et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: