A Model of Rhetorical Legitimization and the Case of Quality Assessment in Higher Education

Abstract

The Department of Education (DoE) and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) are regulatory agencies in the system of accreditation that influence both the quality and reputation of colleges and universities. Recent criticism (e.g., Butler, 2012; Obama, 2013b; Weissburg, 2009; Wellman, 1998) of accreditation processes in the United States and changing legislation (i.e., DoE, 2014e) brought attention to how stakeholders perceived these organizations. This dissertation explored the accreditation-related, web-based rhetoric of the DoE and CHEA to uncover how these organizations responded to stakeholder concerns regarding higher educational quality assessment. Grounded in legitimacy theory (Chung, 2010), a Rhetorical Legitimization Model was developed to illustrate the strategies used by the DoE and CHEA. Both organizations: (1) employed the legitimizing strategy of isomorphism that encouraged regulatory legitimacy, (2) utilized impression management that encouraged pragmatic legitimacy, and (3) engaged in a dialogic approach that encouraged normative legitimacy. This study also found that, although the rhetorical strategies used by the organizations were strikingly similar, the DoE and CHEA varied in the utilization of impression management and a dialogic approach to legitimization. The results of this study likely provide valuable information to practitioners and researchers regarding how accreditation-related organizations utilize rhetoric to influence legitimacy.