Home | About CEA | FAQs | For students | Contact CEA

•  
• Accredited
  Programs & Institutions
•  
• Accreditation Basics:
• Accreditation
  Process
• CEA Standards
• Application Forms
• Workshop Schedule
• Fee Schedule
• Governance:
• Commission
• Meeting Dates
• Recent Decisions
• Upcoming
  Reviews
• Constituent Council
• Reviewers
• International Accreditation
• CEA Policies & Procedures
• CEA News
• Complaints
• Conference Presentations
• Friends of CEA
• Commissioner Login
•  

About CEA

Background:
English language teaching for international students in the US

Thousands of international students enter the U.S. each year for postsecondary study. Some come to pursue academic degrees in institutions of higher education. Others come to pursue personal or professional goals. Whatever their long-term goals, many enroll in courses to improve their English language skills. Such English courses, called English as a Second (Foreign) Language (ESL/EFL), are offered by universities, colleges, and community colleges, as well as by independent English language schools. The most common form of English courses in this context is what is termed an intensive English program (IEP), the first of which was established at the University of Michigan in 1948. An intensive English program typically offers 18 to 24 hours per week of instruction in a course of study designed to assist the student in achieving a particular set of goals.

The IEP selected by the student may be university or college administered, or it may be an independent English language institution operating under contact with the college or university to offer courses on campus. The IEP may also be an English language institution that exists independent of any higher education institution. Students in these institutions may or may not be college bound.

One of the courses of study commonly offered by IEPs is a university preparatory program. Such programs provide students with the language skills necessary for entrance into, and success in, a college or university degree program. Students may be referred to university preparatory IEPs after failing to achieve the institution's minimum required score on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), a standardized test used by many universities to screen applicants for language proficiency, or students may apply to and enter an IEP directly, prior to beginning a university application process.

Intensive English programs also offer courses of study other than those that prepare students for university study. Many international students come to the U.S. to acquire language skills for professional purposes and, consequently, IEPs have developed courses of study that focus on such goals as developing English for business purposes or English for use in a particular trade or profession. International students also come to the U.S. to acquire an understanding of American language and culture, and IEPs accommodate these students by providing short-term courses combining English language learning with instruction related to American history and culture. Some of these IEPs provide interaction with the local community, through home stays for example, as a way for students to obtain a greater understanding of the U.S. and its people.

Because IEPs serve international students with minimal language skills who in many cases are undertaking their first trip abroad, IEPs do much more than simply teach English. IEPs need to support students as they adapt to a new language, culture, and set of customs. Such support may include orientation workshops, advisement and counseling, and the integration of survival skills (the basics of functioning in the new culture) into the curriculum.

It is estimated that there may be over 1,000 English language programs and institutions throughout the country. Interest in standard-setting and accreditation results from the profession's interest in ensuring that international students who enter the U.S. to study receive the education that these programs and institutions promise in their recruiting efforts. The challenge for an accrediting agency has been to take into consideration the many varieties of English language programs and institutions that exist.

Development of CEA

CEA is best understood as the culmination of a series of efforts by the ESL/EFL teaching profession to create a common, verifiable set of standards for English language instruction.

During the 1960's directors of a number of university-based intensive English programs came together to develop a common set of standards for their programs. Working through the National Association of Foreign Student Affairs (NAFSA), they developed a set of standards and a process of self-study and external review. The effort resulted in the creation in 1967 of an independent professional organization, the University and College Intensive English Programs (UCIEP) consortium. Membership, and thus the review process, was restricted to university and college IEPs with particular structural characteristics. To broaden participation in a process of external review, in the 1980s TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.), a professional membership association, developed a program review document that could be used by all types of IEPs for self-improvement; however, there was no external validation that an IEP had met the standards provided in the self-study document.

By the mid-1980's the population of intensive English programs in the U.S. had grown, and with that growth came the desire among IEP professionals for a common set of standards, applicable to all IEPs, both those in universities and colleges and those in independent institutions. In 1988, the American Association of Intensive English Programs (AAIEP) was chartered to represent both university-operated and independent English language schools. From 1987 to 1990, AAIEP worked to develop a set of standards, but by 1991, it was clear to the AAIEP governing board that it would be difficult for AAIEP to become an accrediting organization. AAIEP lacked the resources, and it was active as an advocate for member programs, which had the potential to be incompatible with its role as an accrediting organization. The board chose TESOL as the most appropriate organization to lead the effort and requested that TESOL take on the development effort.

In 1993, the TESOL established the Accreditation Task Force, comprising members of AAIEP, NAFSA, TESOL, and UCIEP who represented the various types of English language programs and institutions in the US. Two surveys indicated that there was strong interest in accreditation and that it would be feasible and desirable for TESOL to develop an agency. TESOL then appointed members to an Accreditation Advisory Committee (AAC) and charged it with drafting standards and creating the structure for an accrediting agency for intensive English programs in the U.S.

The AAC met three times a year from 1995-1997 to draft standards, with on-going input from the field of interest and began to create administrative and governance structures for an accrediting agency. USDE regulations for recognized accrediting agencies provided the foundation for most policies and procedures, as did those of best practice exemplified by other accrediting agencies. In July 1998, the TESOL Commission on Accreditation held its first meeting. Later, it was decided that it would be better for the accrediting agency to be independent of the membership association, and in October 1999, it was independently incorporated in Virginia under the name of the Commission on English Language Program Accreditation (CEA).

Current Status

CEA has continued its work as a viable accrediting agency for intensive English programs in accredited universities and colleges and for independent language schools, all of whom serve a common mission: the improvement of English language teaching and services for English language students around the world. In September 2003, CEA was recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education as a national accrediting agency for English language programs and institutions. This recognition gave CEA the distinction of being the only specialized accrediting agency for English language programs and institutions in the U.S. In December 2005, the Commission expanded its mission to include the accreditation of English language programs and schools outside the U.S.

In addition to conducting accreditation reviews, CEA is engaged in a number of projects that will enhance the accreditation process and further develop the agency's ability to meet the needs of its constituencies: an extensive standards review project that takes into account reliability and validity issues; a review and revision of materials in the area of student outcomes assessment; a review of distance learning within the field of English language teaching and its affects on accreditation processes; an on-going regulatory review activity so that CEA can be responsive to any changes in immigration policy affecting international student education; attention to issues related to short-term teacher training offered by CEA accreditation independent language institutions; and on-going efforts to ensure site reviewer and commissioner knowledge and consistency in applying the standards and following CEA procedures. In addition, CEA continues on-going consultation with the profession through presentations at national conventions and local conferences and maintains close linkages with founding organizations (AAIEP, NAFSA, TESOL, and UCIEP) through its nomination process and regular distribution of news about accreditation decisions and CEA governance.

CEA's Commission meets up to three times a year and makes accreditation decisions. A list of accredited programs and institutions, updated after each Commission meeting, can be found on this web site. In all of its accreditation reviews, CEA follows its student-centered philosophy of accreditation: that an English language program or institution worthy of accreditation puts students at the center of its efforts; provides a program that supports its mission; has the resources, fiscal and human, to assure that students are well-served; and is able to show that it provides the services it promises to students.