Accreditation, Assurance of Learning, and Accounting Education Outcomes: Evidence from the Accounting Program at Qassim University’s College of Business and Economics

Abstract

This paper examines how accreditation-driven Assurance of Learning and quality assurance practices are associated with outcomes in a Saudi accounting programme housed within an AACSB-accredited College of Business and Economics. Using an explanatory single-case design, the study combines longitudinal programme indicators (2018–2025) with qualitative process evidence from internal quality documents and stakeholder interviews. Outcomes are compared between a pre-accreditation period (2018–2019) and a post-accreditation period (2021–2025), treating 2020 as a transition year. Quantitative change is assessed using before-and-after tests aligned with the measurement scale (e.g., tests of proportions and exact tests for small samples), supported by descriptive trend review; qualitative content analysis is used to explain observed patterns and assess plausible internal mechanisms. The design is intended to identify within-case temporal associations rather than causal effects. Results indicate a substantial post-accreditation improvement in internally controllable outcomes, particularly professional/national exam performance, a pattern consistent with stronger assurance-of-learning routines and faculty-development activity in the post-accreditation period. In contrast, employment within six months of graduation declined, suggesting that realised employment outcomes remain strongly conditioned by labour-market factors beyond programme-level control. Progression to postgraduate study remained broadly stable with no statistically significant post-accreditation shift. The study concludes that accreditation-associated quality-assurance processes may support measurable academic gains, while employability improvements require complementary institutional and labour-market support. Findings should be interpreted in light of the single-case design, the short pre-accreditation window, and the absence of a contemporaneous comparison programme.