The Gold Standard of Education | CIS International School Accreditation, Membership, Preparatory Evaluation, Self-Study and Team Evaluation

Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence

Start with the Council of International Schools directory or the school’s current CIS record and identify the exact legal school, campus and state: member, registered for accreditation, moving through evaluation, or accredited. CIS membership is a quality relationship with its own eligibility and standards. It is not the same as the award of CIS International Accreditation. The current registration page also says accreditation applies to the whole school, not one section, and requires the school to be a CIS member and to have operated for at least two full academic years.

Read the live developmental sequence rather than relying on a badge: membership eligibility and engagement, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversations, Preparatory Evaluation, school-led self-study with two to four Development Initiatives, Team Evaluation by trained peer evaluators, and CIS’s outcome. The present framework describes eighteen standards across Guiding Principles, Learning and Well-being. Because CIS has evolved its framework and older public summaries can describe earlier cycles, confirm the current decision, scope and next evaluation directly instead of converting a visit date into an assumed expiry date.

This guide was checked on 29 October 2026 against current primary guidance. CIS sources checked on 29 October 2026 include the current membership application, accreditation registration requirements, framework, cycle, parent explanation and FAQs. A member school can still be working toward accreditation. A Preparatory Evaluation or Team Evaluation is evidence in a process, not the final award. CIS status does not replace government licensing, curriculum or examination-board authorisation, immigration rules, safeguarding enforcement or a receiving institution’s learner-specific decision.

This specialist sits under The Gold Standard of Education: Learning That Transfers into Life. The parent framework keeps the purpose visible: understand the system, act on the correct evidence and build independence for the next decision.

Contents and reading routes

Use the quick route for an immediate decision, the complete route for a live case, and the teaching route when helping a learner explain the mechanism.

Quick route: chapters 1, 4, 7, 10 and 12.
Complete route: chapters 1–12, authoritative sources, verification workbook and FAQs.
Teaching route: chapters 2–3, worked case in chapter 7, and failure repair in chapter 10.

Open the chapter index

Find the exact CIS school record
Separate membership from accreditation
Check whole-school eligibility
Read registration as the formal start
Use Cornerstone Conversations correctly
Interpret Preparatory Evaluation
Worked case: member school with an accreditation claim
Follow two to four Development Initiatives
Read the Team Evaluation
Handle changed frameworks and old summaries
Join accreditation to local authority and programme approval
Ask the receiving institution

1. Find the exact CIS school record

Match legal name, campus, country and current directory state.

A similar name or school-group logo can point to the wrong entity.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the receiving organisation changes. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Contents · Next chapter

2. Separate membership from accreditation

Record whether the school is a member, registered, in evaluation or accredited.

Membership is not the accreditation award.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the record is older than expected. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

3. Check whole-school eligibility

Confirm the operating licence, two full academic years and whole-school scope.

CIS does not accredit only a primary, secondary or international section.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a deadline moves forward. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

4. Read registration as the formal start

Keep the registration record and current framework version.

An intention to pursue accreditation is not registration or an outcome.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the programme changes after an offer. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

5. Use Cornerstone Conversations correctly

Trace reflective dialogue about purpose, practices, planning and development.

A supportive conversation is not a decision letter.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: one identifier is wrong. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

6. Interpret Preparatory Evaluation

Record the visit, readiness findings and co-constructed self-study plan.

A completed preparatory visit does not make the school accredited.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a listing is current but the intake is not. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

7. Worked case: member school with an accreditation claim

Join the child’s exact campus to the current CIS outcome and dates.

A membership listing cannot fill a missing accreditation outcome.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes jurisdiction. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

8. Follow two to four Development Initiatives

Map the school’s priorities to the relevant standards and evidence.

A strategic aspiration should not be recorded as achieved impact.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: evidence arrives after an internal deadline. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

9. Read the Team Evaluation

Separate peer validation, dialogue and feedback from CIS’s final outcome.

A team’s visit is not itself the award.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a published route disappears. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

10. Handle changed frameworks and old summaries

Prefer current CIS pages and the school’s live decision over an older cycle description.

Do not invent an expiry date from a visit date.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the decision-maker asks for the original document. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

11. Join accreditation to local authority and programme approval

Verify licensing, safeguarding and curriculum or examination authorisation separately.

CIS cannot confer another authority’s permission.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the search result is correct but incomplete. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

12. Ask the receiving institution

Obtain the next school or university’s decision for this learner.

CIS accreditation cannot guarantee admission, transfer credit or recognition.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school states the present decision in one sentence. CIS and its School Support and Evaluation Officer, trained peer evaluators, the exact whole school and governing body, local licensing authority, curriculum or awarding body, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the CIS directory entry, membership approval, code-of-ethics commitment, accreditation registration, Cornerstone Conversation records, Preparatory Evaluation evidence, development plan, self-study submission, Team Evaluation report, accreditation outcome, follow-up record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes goal. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents

Authoritative sources and evidence boundary

These primary sources were checked on 29 October 2026. Reopen the live record near any enrolment, recognition, immigration, transfer, funding or licensing decision because statuses, dates and operating guidance can change.

A source can establish only the fact within its remit. Keep the current authority record beside learner-specific evidence and obtain the responsible organisation’s written decision where acceptance, credit, protection, immigration or eligibility is at stake.

Verification workbook

Complete every line with a dated official page, document, recorded state or named follow-up. A blank is useful because it shows where certainty has not yet been earned.

CIS directory
Legal school name
Campus
Country
Operating licence
Whole-school scope
CIS member
Code of Ethics
Two academic years
Accreditation registration
Cornerstone Conversations
Preparatory Evaluation
Readiness plan
Development Initiatives
Self-study evidence
Eighteen standards
Team Evaluation
Peer report
CIS outcome
Follow-up
Learner dates
Receiver decision

Build an auditable decision file

Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current current CIS directory entry and the school’s latest CIS accreditation outcome letter, the learner-specific record and the receiver’s published requirements. A general webpage explains a rule; it does not replace a learner-specific decision from the responsible body.

Create one evidence row for each controlling fact: legal school identity, campus, licence, whole-school scope, membership state, two full academic years, registration, Cornerstone expectations, Preparatory Evaluation, readiness plan, Development Initiatives, eighteen standards, self-study evidence, Team Evaluation, peer feedback, accreditation outcome, follow-up, learner dates and receiver decision. Give every row a source, retrieval date, status and owner. Mark a fact confirmed only when the cited source proves it. Use reported, estimated or pending for everything else.

Separate inputs from outputs. Inputs are facts supplied by the learner, provider or authority. Outputs are comparisons, classifications and decisions made from them. If an output looks wrong, check the input, then the dated rule, then any recorded exception.

Keep a change log for school identity, campus, licence, membership state, whole-school scope, registration, framework version, development initiative, visit date, outcome, follow-up, learner dates and destination rules. Record the old fact, new fact, date learned, source and every conclusion that must be reopened. Do not silently overwrite the earlier state; the history explains why a reasonable plan changed.

Add a deadline map with the formal deadline, an earlier internal deadline and the recovery route if evidence arrives late. Where no recovery route is published, record that absence rather than inventing one. Reopen the official page near the action date because archived guidance can look authoritative.

Use a responsibility matrix. CIS owns membership and accreditation outcomes; the school owns delivery, improvement and learner records; government owns permission to operate; curriculum and awarding bodies own programme authorisation; receiving institutions own admission and recognition decisions. If two people assume the other has acted, the file should expose the gap before the deadline.

Keep a contact note for each official enquiry: channel, date, question, answer and reference number. If verbal advice conflicts with a published rule or written decision, ask for clarification in writing before an irreversible action.

Run a source hierarchy check. Put the responsible authority first, current operational guidance second, the learner-specific notice third and informal explanation last. Where two official pages appear inconsistent, record both dates and ask which governs the present case.

Schedule a cold review two working days before any irreversible boundary. Recheck names, identifiers, dates, programme codes, study load and document version. Save the submission acknowledgement without treating receipt as approval.

After the decision, reconcile the notice with the plan line by line. Record what was accepted, refused, limited or deferred and the route for correction, review or appeal. Preserve the original decision when adding later correspondence.

Add a “not yet proved” page. List every conclusion that still depends on legal school identity, campus, licence, whole-school scope, membership state, two full academic years, registration, Cornerstone expectations, Preparatory Evaluation, readiness plan, Development Initiatives, eighteen standards, self-study evidence, Team Evaluation, peer feedback, accreditation outcome, follow-up, learner dates and receiver decision. Beside each item, name the smallest official record that would settle it and the person who can obtain that record. This stops a plausible estimate from drifting into the confirmed column merely because it has been repeated.

Rehearse a correction request before one is needed. Identify the learner, present decision, disputed input, supporting document and requested remedy without claiming an entitlement the evidence cannot establish. Address it to the organisation that owns the record or decision, keep a copy, and record the published response or escalation route.

Ask an independent reader to challenge the file. They should identify the weakest assumption, locate the official sentence that controls it and describe what changes if the assumption fails. Record that answer without deleting the earlier reasoning; the audit trail should show learning, not pretend uncertainty never existed.

Build a conservative time and cost plan beside the evidence file. Show what is already confirmed, what is estimated, which payment or enrolment step becomes irreversible and when. Then test a delayed decision and a less favourable outcome. The exercise does not predict the authority’s answer; it prevents an optimistic reading from becoming an unexamined commitment.

Ask the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking a CIS member or accredited school to narrate the case aloud in under two minutes: “This is my present state; this is the governing source; this is the learner-specific evidence; this is the unresolved boundary; this is my next permitted action.” A listener should be able to distinguish fact, comparison and choice without prompting.

Practise one counterfactual. Change only the school name stays the same but the learner changes campus, age division, accreditation stage, completion date or receiving institution and trace which conclusions stay valid. The exercise reveals whether the learner understands the dependency chain or has memorised an answer belonging to another case.

Finish with a retention plan. Keep source documents, decisions, receipts and later corrections for as long as they remain useful to explain the education record. Store identifiers securely and share only what the named recipient needs.

Frequently asked questions

Is every CIS member school accredited?

No. Membership and International Accreditation are distinct states.

Can CIS accredit one section of a school?

No. The current registration requirements say the whole school must be included.

How long must a school operate before registering?

At least two full academic years under the current CIS eligibility page.

What happens at Preparatory Evaluation?

CIS-led evaluators engage the school, confirm readiness and co-construct the self-study plan.

What does the self-study develop?

Two to four Development Initiatives tied to standards and strategic priorities.

Does the Team Evaluation itself award accreditation?

No. It supplies peer evaluation evidence for the CIS outcome.

Is an old cycle length enough to prove current status?

No. Use the current directory and latest outcome letter.

Does CIS accreditation guarantee university admission?

No. The receiving institution decides admission and recognition.

Close the workbook by explaining the process without notes. A dependable explanation names the authority, present state, evidence, deadline and consequence if one assumption fails.

Continue with this Education batch

These companion guides use the same evidence-first method for a different register, framework or recognition decision.

Continue through the Education branch

Return to The Gold Standard of Education. Continue with the international-school pathways guide, the institutional and programme accreditation guide, the official international-curriculum source guide, the Cognia school-accreditation specialist, the NEASC international-school accreditation specialist, the IB World School authorisation specialist. Each guide preserves the specialist owner while showing how records, qualifications and decisions connect.