Search

The COVID-19 pandemic caused unprecedented disruption to education around the world. There is much to learn from this period, to better understand what happened, to provide support to those affected, and to inform future responses to disruption. This research aimed to contribute to this field by recording teachers' experiences of teaching in the pandemic. The authors carried out a survey of teachers at schools that use Cambridge Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM) assessments, with the intention of sampling a wide range of experiences, from multiple countries, from primary and secondary schools, and from state and independent schools. In doing so, the authors hoped to engage with both the overall patterns and the variation in experiences. The survey asked questions about impacts on students, impacts on teachers, and teaching practices. Although findings were wide-ranging, several emerging themes were identified. These were: (1) learning loss was common but more complex than may be acknowledged; (2) wellbeing of both students and teachers is an important consideration; (3) lessons can be learned from experiences of remote teaching, both in terms of the challenges faced and the beneficial aspects experienced; (4) parents played a vital role in education during the pandemic, presenting potential opportunities for continued engagement; (5) experiences were variable within and between groups, and this should be explicitly considered when supporting affected students; (6) developing communities of practice and good quality training resources was beneficial and could continue to be so outside of the pandemic; and (7) despite the challenges faced, there are opportunities to change 'normal' practice as a result of what was learned during the period of disruption. This report is intended primarily as a description of the study background and methodology, and as a repository of results, whilst the emerging themes indicate where there is potential for further research or, indeed, action to support those affected.

Each month, the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC) surveys a random sample of individuals who three months prior registered on mba.com--the GMAC™ website for prospective graduate business students. Their survey responses provide an inside look into the decision-making process of people currently considering applying to a graduate business school program. The findings detailed in this report are based on responses from a total of 8,430 individuals surveyed between January and December 2020. Survey respondents represent demand for various MBA and business master's "program categories," including full-time MBA, professional MBA, executive MBA, and business master's programs. Each program category contains specific "program types." For example, full-time MBA programs include full-time one-year and full-time two-year MBA programs. Professional MBA programs include part-time, flexible, and online MBA programs. Business master's programs include Master in Management, Master of Finance, Master of Data Analytics, and Master of Accounting, among others. [The following individuals made significant contributions to the publication of this report: Alexandria Williams, Devina Caruthers, and Tacoma Williams. For the 2020 Summary Report, see ED626970.]

Principals (policy makers) have debated the progress in U.S. student performance for a half century or more. Informing these conversations, survey agents have administered seven million psychometrically linked tests in math and reading in 160 waves to national probability samples of selected cohorts born between 1954 and 2007. This study is the first to assess consistency of results by agency. We find results vary by agent, but consistent with Flynn effects, gains are larger in math than reading, except for the most recent period. Non-whites progress at a faster pace. Socio-economically disadvantaged white, black, and Hispanic students make greater progress when tested in elementary school, but that advantage attenuates and reverses itself as students age. We discuss potential moderators.

This year, widespread school closures due to the coronavirus pandemic have required almost all high-performing systems to implement distance learning to ensure that students continue learning. This document summarizes some initial takeaways from their experiences implementing distance learning in primary and secondary schools. Findings show that top-performing jurisdictions: (1) Were initially better positioned than the U.S. to quickly implement distance learning; (2) Increased capacity in this area since the start of distance learning; and (3) Responded rapidly to new challenges raised by distance learning. The paper also looks toward the future, as jurisdictions worldwide reflect on what they learned during this year's distance learning experiment and consider the role of online and in-person schooling in the fall and beyond.

When the COVID-19 pandemic erupted, it dismantled daily routines, the economy, and the health care system nearly overnight. The time could not be more crucial for a conversation about how to build and sustain career pathways that achieve these aims; such systems connect high-quality K-12 education with career training that leads to good jobs. There are lessons to be learned from the vocational education training (VET) systems in Germany, Singapore, and Switzerland. These countries enjoy strong academic outcomes, low youth unemployment rates, and high worker productivity and standards of living. While not without flaws, the vocational education programs in these countries are strong because they are aligned with local economic needs and are the pathway of choice for the majority of students. This report provides a brief history of career and technical education in the United States. It also presents a vision for a revamped career and technical education (CTE) system according to a five-part framework that is based on components of high-quality systems and culls lessons learned from the high-quality VET programs of Germany, Singapore, and Switzerland. Recommendations are made for federal and state governments, labor unions, and employers to implement high-quality CTE programs.

Each month, the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC) surveys a random sample of individuals who three months prior registered on mba.com--the GMAC™ website for prospective graduate business students. Their survey responses provide an inside look into the decision-making process of people currently considering applying to a graduate business school program. The findings detailed in this supplemental report are based on responses from a total of 9,617 individuals surveyed between January and December 2018. Survey respondents represent demand for various MBA and business master's "program categories", including full-time MBA, professional MBA, executive MBA, and business master's programs. Each program category contains specific "program types". For example, full-time MBA programs include full-time one-year and full-time two-year MBA programs. Professional MBA programs include part-time, flexible, and online MBA programs. Business master's programs include Master in Management, Master of Finance, Master of Data Analytics, and Master of Accounting, among others. This report--a supplement to "Demand for MBA and Business Master's Programs: Insights on Candidate Decision Making" summary report--provides detailed breakdowns of 2018 candidate survey responses by a number of variables of interest to school professionals, including by program type, candidate country of citizenship and residence, and candidate preferred study destination. [Contributors of the report include: Rhonda Daniel, Matt Hazenbush, Gregg Schoenfeld, Tacoma Williams, and Devina Caruthers. For the summary report, see ED598219.]

Vocational education and training (VET) is a major policy topic for countries all over the world, who are eager to learn from the best examples where participation in VET is high and youth unemployment is low. Policymakers want to know how strong VET systems manage challenges like rapid technological change, matching labor market demand for skills, attracting enrollment, and creating high-status VET programs. There is a perception that the secret lies in the intended curricula of successful VET programs, and a curriculum comparison of better and worse programs could uncover it. The hope seems to be that such a comparison would yield a simple solution--incorporate more STEM subjects perhaps, or make sure all students learn soft skills. However, that is not the case. What differentiates the strongest and weakest VET programs is the level of linkage between actors from the education and employment systems. This comparative report defines and measures the linkage between VET education and employment systems, then uses it to compare the largest upper-secondary VET programs from 20 countries. [This report was produced by the KOF Swiss Economic Institute in Zurich.]

In 2020 and 2021, schooling, like many other aspects of life, has been heavily affected by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. During periods of school closure, education systems and schools have often been quick to organise remote support for home-based learning. But several observers have questioned the effectiveness of these schooling surrogates, either in general or for particular types of students. Initial data from national assessments confirm that the results of many students who experienced school closures (particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds) lag behind those of similar students in previous school years. Learning losses and gains are often compared to the typical learning progression observed in normal times over a year of schooling. This paper shows how international data can be used to investigate learning losses and gains over a school year.

Digital technologies are increasingly present in young children's lives. How can early education systems get the best out of digitalisation while minimising its risks? This is especially urgent as the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated our reliance on digital tools -- tools that enabled young children to continue learning when early education centres and primary schools closed down. It is in this context that the OECD conducted a policy survey covering 34 countries and jurisdictions. It investigates how digital technologies were used to provide distance education for young children in 2020, which challenges arose and what policy changes are in the pipeline for early education. [The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia provided financial support for this report.]

This report shares data in the following categories as they relate to graduates in Ontario's economy: (1) Number of jobs for young adults without post-secondary credentials; (2) Matching credentials to employer needs: an international comparison; (3) Matching credentials to employer needs: industry, entrepreneurship, and innovation; (4) Access to post-secondary education in Ontario; and (5) Return on investments in post-secondary education. Among the highlighted findings are: (1) Over the past 25 years, rising Ontario employer skill requirements have led to an increase of over 900,000 more jobs for adults aged 25 to 44 with post-­secondary credentials, largely offset by a drop of 700,000 jobs for those without post­-secondary credentials; (2) Every sector now employs fewer young adults without post-­secondary credentials; (3) Ontario's experience is consistent with other jurisdictions: employment rates for young adults without post­secondary education are now typically at least 25 percentage points lower than for post-­secondary graduates; (4) Within North America, Ontario has three times as many college graduates as the U.S., per capita; and (5) Ontario's skills advantage is weakening. China, Japan, Korea and Indonesia now have three times as many young adults with post-­secondary credentials as does the U.S.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an intergovernmental economic organisation with 35 member countries, founded in 1961 to stimulate economic progress and world trade. The Organisation for works with countries to develop skills strategies tailored to specific needs and contexts. The Organisation prepared a global skills strategy outline over the period 2011 to 2013. Each national skills strategy country project offers a tailored approach to focus on the unique skills challenges, context and objectives of each country. Each project leverages OECD comparative data and policy analysis, fosters collaboration across ministerial portfolios and levels of government while engaging all relevant stakeholders--employers, trade unions, and civil society organisations. In its paper "Towards an OECD Skills Strategy" (OECD 2013), the OECD sets out the main issues which must be addressed by efficient and effective policies for skills formation and skills use. The majority of material in each of the 13 case summaries presented here has been lifted mostly verbatim from original sources. These sources are stated at the beginning of each case summary. [This document is an added resource for the report "Identifying Work Skills: International Approaches. Discussion Paper" which can be accessed in ERIC at ED579874.]

The digital revolution and automation are accelerating changes in the labour market and in workplace skills, changes that are further affected by fluctuations in international and regional economic cycles and employment opportunity. These factors pose a universal policy challenge for all advanced economies and governments. In the workplace, people seek to acquire contemporary and relevant skills to gain employment and retain transferable skills to maintain employment. The central purpose of this paper is to investigate how other nations or regions are dealing with these issues. What approaches are they taking to understanding the mix and dynamics of the skills attained by individuals and, more broadly, the totality of skills that in aggregate constitute a highly capable and adaptable labour force, one that supports firm viability and greater national productivity. This research has examined a range of initiatives and approaches being developed or in use in selected countries, including the United States, Singapore and New Zealand, and agencies/organisations; for example, the European Commission and the Skills for the Information Age Foundation. In doing so, it showcases the good practices used to ensure that occupational-level skills information remains current and widely accessible. [For "Identifying Work Skills: International Case Summaries. Support Document," see ED579875.]

As we have seen throughout these chapters, the conceptions and practices of school leadership do not correspond to disembodied standards promoted by international organizations. Their influences are highly dependent on the historical, cultural, and social context within each country and its education system. Some of them have a strong tradition of immigration, such as the United States, the United Kingdom and France. They face major problems in the recognition of ethnic and racial differences. They try to develop leadership practices to welcome these differences and view diversity as source of strength but are often confronted with communitarian and nationalist tensions that make it difficult to reduce discrimination and inequality. Such developments highlight the importance of well-being and care in school leadership, particularly in terms of social inclusion. By contrast, Nordic countries, and to a lesser extent Switzerland, have built up a strong cultural and national identity that sustains social cohesion. It facilitates a type of consensual school leadership at the local level. Other education systems including New Zealand, Singapore and China have been built on a common understanding of multiculturality that provides guidance for living together and for forging a common destiny. For these countries, the community also represents a structuring element to maintain good relationships between leaders, teachers, students, and parents. [For the complete volume, "The Cultural and Social Foundations of Educational Leadership: An International Comparison. Educational Governance Research. Volume 16," see ED615841.]

The Teacher Education and Development Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M), conducted under the aegis of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), was designed to inform policy and practice in mathematics teacher education. For educational policymakers, TEDS-M contributes data on institutional arrangements that are effective in helping future teachers become sufficiently knowledgeable in mathematics and related teaching knowledge. For the teacher educators who design, implement, and evaluate teacher education curricula, TEDS-M contributes a shared terminology, a shared database, and benchmarks for examining their teacher education provision against what has proved possible and desirable to do in other settings. For mathematics teachers in schools, TEDS-M provides a better understanding of what qualified teachers of mathematics learn about the content and pedagogy of mathematics during their preservice education, as well as about the arrangements and conditions conducive to acquisition of this knowledge. For educators in general and for informed laypersons, TEDS-M provides a better understanding about what and how teachers learn as they prepare to teach. The TEDS-M joint-international research centers at Michigan State University (MSU) and the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) worked from 2006 to 2011 with the study's national research coordinators (NRCs) in the 17 participating countries to develop, implement, and report on the findings of this study. TEDS-M asked three key questions: (1) What are the policies that support primary and secondary teachers' achieved level and depth of mathematics and related teaching knowledge? (2) What learning opportunities available to prospective primary and lower- secondary mathematics teachers allow them to attain such knowledge? and (3) What level and depth of mathematics and related teaching knowledge have prospective primary and lower-secondary teachers attained by the end of their preservice teacher education? The first research question was addressed through individual case study country reports, questionnaires, and interviews issued by the TEDS-M international study centers. The second and third research questions were answered via surveys of nationally representative samples of: (1) Teacher education institutions and programs; (2) Teacher educators; (3) Future primary school teachers preparing to teach mathematics; and (4) Future lower-secondary school teachers also preparing to teach mathematics. The rest of this report presents the technical details associated with TEDS-M. A brief description of the content of each chapter is provided in Chapter 1. Individual chapters are authored by different groups of contributors and present references, exhibits, and notes as appropriate. Appended are: (1) TEDS-M 2008 Route Questionnaire; (2) TEDS-M Guidelines on Writing Country Reports; (3) Characteristics of National Samples: Implementations of the International Sampling Design in Participating Countries; (4) TEDS-M Sampling Frame Questionnaire and Forms; (5) Mobilizing National Support and Recruiting Institutions; (6) Future Primary Teachers' OTL and Belief Indices: International Reliability and Descriptive Statistics; (7) Future Secondary Teachers' OTL and Belief Indices: International Reliability and Descriptive Statistics; (8) Future Primary and Secondary Teachers' and Educators' OTL and Belief Scales: International Reliabilities; (9) Field Trial of the Institutional, Future Teacher, and Educator Questionnaires; (10) Model Fit Statistics for the Opportunity to Learn Scales; (11) Model Fit Statistics for the Opportunity to Learn Scales for Future Teachers and Educators by Country; (12) Changes for Calibration of MCK/MPCK Primary Items; (13) Changes for Calibration of MCK/MPCK Secondary Items; (14) Control Parameters for Model and Case Estimation: Mathematical Content Knowledge and Mathematics Pedagogical Content Knowledge; (15) Mathematics Content Knowledge and Mathematics Pedagogical Content Knowledge Scales; (16) TEDS-M Test Reliabilities; (17) Anchor Point Descriptions; (18) Program-Groupings: Future Teachers (Primary); (19) Program-Groupings: Future Teachers (Secondary); and (20) Listings of Organizations and Individuals Responsible for TEDS-M. [Contributors include Kiril Bankov; Alena Becker; Falk Brese; Soo-Yong Byun; Ralph Carstens; Jean Dumais; Lawrence Ingvarson; Yang Lu; Yukiko Maeda; Barbara Malak-Minkiewicz; Sabine Meinck; Ray Peck; Inese Berzina-Pitcher; Marc Reckase; Michael Rodríguez; Glenn Rowley; John Schwille; Sharon L. Senk; Maria Teresa Tatto; Alana Yu]

The Teacher Education and Development Study (TEDS-M) is the first crossnational study to examine the mathematics preparation of future teachers for both primary and secondary school levels. The study, conducted under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), collected data from representative samples of future teachers and their educators. The study's key research questions focused on the relationships between teacher education policies, institutional practices, and the mathematics and pedagogy knowledge of future teachers at the end of their preservice education. Seventeen countries participated in TEDS-M. Data were gathered from approximately 22,000 future teachers from 750 programs in about 500 teacher education institutions. Teaching staff within these programs were also surveyed. They included close to 5,000 mathematicians, mathematics educators, and general pedagogy educators. This report presents various characteristics of teacher education systems. It shows that, of the TEDS-M participating countries, those where future teachers have greater knowledge of mathematics and mathematics teaching pedagogy are also those that place greatest emphasis on policies directed toward accomplishing the following: enabling the teaching profession to compete for high-ability secondary school graduates; balancing teacher demand and supply; ensuring a rigorous system of assessment/accreditation of teacher education programs; and setting high standards for entry to the profession (i.e., gaining registration licensing) after graduation. These results are consistent with teacher education policy discussions occurring nationally and internationally about the most successful processes for assuring teacher quality. The results also provide information useful for policymakers in their endeavors to improve policy and practice relating to preparing teachers of mathematics. Following an introduction by Lawrence Ingvarson, chapters include: (1) Organization of Teacher Education and Its Contexts across the TEDS-M Countries (John Schwille, Lawrence Ingvarson, Maria Teresa Tatto, Richard Holdgreve-Resendez, Wangjun Kim, and Soo-Yong Byun); (2) The Distinctive National Imprint of Each TEDS-M System (John Schwille, Richard Holdgreve-Resendez, Wangjun Kim, and Patrick Leahy); (3) Historical Perspectives on the Policies and Organization of Teacher Education (John Schwille); (4) The Positions and Careers for Which Teachers Are Being Prepared (John Schwille and Richard Holdgreve-Resendez); (5) The Relevance of Quality Assurance of Teacher Education within the Context of TEDS-M (Lawrence Ingvarson); (6) Recent Research on Quality Assurance in Teacher Education (Lawrence Ingvarson); (7) Recruitment and Selection in Teacher Education (Lawrence Ingvarson); (8) Regulation and Accreditation of Teacher Education Institutions and Programs (Lawrence Ingvarson); (9) Entry to Teaching (Lawrence Ingvarson); and (10) Quality Assurance and Teacher Education: Summary of Findings (Lawrence Ingvarson). Two appendices present: (1) Supplementary Exhibits Relating to Chapter 2; and (2) Listings of Organizations and Individuals Responsible for TEDS-M. (Individual chapters contain references.) [TEDS-M was conducted under the auspices of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). The College of Education at Michigan State University (MSU) and the Australian Council of Educational Research (ACER) were appointed by IEA as the joint international study centers (ISCs) for TEDS-M. To design and carry out the study, the ISCs worked in collaboration with the IEA Data Processing and Research Center (DPC), the IEA Secretariat in Amsterdam, Statistics Canada, and the TEDS-M national research centers in the 17 participating countries. Together, these teams of researchers and institutions conceptualized the study, designed and administered the instruments, collected and analyzed the data, and reported the results.]

The Teacher Education Study in Mathematics (TEDS-M) 2008 is the first cross-national study to provide data on the knowledge that future primary and lower-secondary school teachers acquire during their mathematics teacher education. It is also the first major study to examine variations in the nature and influence of teacher education programs within and across countries. The impetus for TEDS-M, conducted in 17 countries under the aegis of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), was recognition that teaching mathematics in primary and secondary schools has become more challenging worldwide as knowledge demands change and large numbers of teachers reach retirement age. It has also become increasingly clear that effectively responding to demands for teacher preparation reform will remain difficult while there is lack of consensus on what such reform should encompass and while the range of alternatives continues to be poorly understood let alone based on evidence of what works. TEDS-M accordingly focused on collecting, from the varied national and cultural settings represented by the participating countries, empirical data that could inform policy and practice related to recruiting and preparing a new generation of teachers capable of teaching increasingly demanding mathematics curricula. Two particular purposes underpinned this work. The first was to identify how the countries participating in TEDS-M prepare teachers to teach mathematics in primary and lower-secondary schools. The second was to study variation in the nature and impact of teacher education programs on mathematics teaching and learning within and across the participating countries. The key research questions for the study focused on the relationships between teacher education policies, institutional practices, and future-teachers' mathematics content knowledge and mathematics pedagogy knowledge. The 17 countries that participated in TEDS-M were Botswana, Canada (four provinces), Chile, Chinese Taipei, Georgia, Germany, Malaysia, Norway, Oman (lower-secondary teacher education only), the Philippines, Poland, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Spain (primary teacher education only), Switzerland (German-speaking cantons), Thailand, and the United States of America (public institutions only). Appended are: (1) Supplementary Exhibits Relating to Chapters 3, 4, 6, and 7; (2) Sampling, Scaling, and Reporting Procedures; and (3) Organizations and Individuals Responsible for TEDS-M. Individual sections contain exhibits, footnotes and references. [This paper was written with the assistance of Jean Dumais, Ralph Carstens, Falk Brese, Sabine Meinck, Inese Berzina-Pitcher, Yang Lu, and Richard Holdgreve-Resendez.]

Rapid technological advances can have an impact on personal, social and professional development. Implications for education include changes in the demand for knowledge and skills as well as expanding possibilities for teaching and learning.

Teachers are the most important school resource. In every country, teachers' salaries and training represent the greatest share of expenditure on education; and this investment in teachers can have significant returns. Research shows that being taught by the best teachers can make a real difference in the learning and life outcomes of otherwise similar students. But not all students are equal when it comes to access to high-quality teaching. In fact, PISA data show that there are inequities in access to experienced and qualified teachers in many countries, and that they are related to the gap in learning outcomes between advantaged and disadvantaged students.

Over the last 50 years, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) has conducted more than 23 large-scale comparative studies of student achievement. The work associated with teacher preparation as well as experience gained in many of IEA's studies, such as TIMSS, led to a request from members of the organization for an in-depth investigation of teacher preparation and training, particularly in terms of the subject area of mathematics. This document provides the framework and specifications for the first IEA study of teacher preparation and training of primary and lower secondary mathematics teachers. The framework outlines a comprehensive approach to investigating and understanding teacher preparation around the world and includes an attempt to understand how national policies and institutional practices influence the outcomes of beginning teachers. This focus on what beginning teachers know and can do makes this study the first of its kind. The overall study has three overlapping components: (1) Component I: Studies of teacher education policy, schooling, and social contexts at the national level; (2) Component II: Studies of primary and lower secondary mathematics teacher education routes, institutions, programs, standards, and expectations for teacher learning; and (3) Component III: Studies of the mathematics and related teaching knowledge of future primary and lower secondary school mathematics teachers. The key research questions for the study focus on the relationships between these components, such as relationships between teacher education policies, institutional practices, and future teacher outcomes. Appended are: (1) Study Design and Data Sources; (2) Item Samples; (3) Expert Panel Meetings; and (4) List of National Research Centers Participating in TEDS-M. (Contains 1 figure, 17 tables, 4 boxes, and 14 footnotes.) [This paper was written with contributions from William Schmidt, Kiril Bankov, Michael Rodriguez, Martin Carnoy, Richard Houang, Lee Cogan, Lynn Paine, and Eduardo Rodrigues.]

PISA 2015 data show that, on average across OECD countries, as many as three out of four students from the lowest quarter of socio-economic status reach, at best, only the baseline level of proficiency (Level 2) in reading, mathematics or science. While in Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong (China), Ireland, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Slovenia and Viet Nam, more than 30% of disadvantaged students scored at Level 3 or above in all PISA subjects in 2015, and can thus be considered "academically resilient". Students who perform at Level 3 begin to demonstrate the ability to construct the meaning of a text and form a detailed understanding from multiple independent pieces of information when reading. They can work with proportional relationships and engage in basic interpretation and reasoning when solving mathematics problems; and they can handle unfamiliar topics in science. Such skills are the foundations for success and further learning later in life. PISA data collected over a decade (in 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2015) show that several countries have been able to increase the share of academically resilient students among those in the bottom quarter of socio-economic status. [This work was supported by a contribution to the PISA programme of work from Vodafone Germany Foundation.]

Institutional accreditation is an important factor for U.S. institutions in determining if credit or degrees from another institution will be accepted. However, accreditation as we understand it does not often exist outside the United States. This 60-Second Survey, in partnership with the Association of International Credential Evaluators (AICE) examines institutional policies pertaining to accreditation status and the acceptance of credit and degrees from foreign institutions. The survey received responses from 588 institutions including several combinations of control, size, type and countries. Among the key findings were: (1) nine out of 10 institutions have a prescribed policy on regional accreditation requirements for admission and transfer-of-credit purposes; (2) more than 70% accept a foreign institution's recognition by a national ministry of education to be equivalent to regional academic accreditation in the United States; (3) less than half accept recognition by a national government board or body overseeing training or employment to be equivalent to regional academic accreditation; (4) less than 15% recognize a non-governmental organization, and less than 20% recognize a governmental board of a foreign government outside of the institution's geographic area as equivalent to regional academic accreditation and (5) the admissions office (54%) is most likely to be responsible for determining whether students' foreign education comes from an accredited school, followed closely by the registrar's office (50%).