The Gold Standard of Education | Cognia School and System Accreditation, Performance Statuses, Initial Review and Continuing Review

Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence

Search the Cognia Accreditation Registry for the exact school or system, then match its legal name, location, institution type and accreditation scope. Membership begins access to Cognia services but is not accreditation. For most new schools, the current public route uses Essential Requirements and an Initial Accreditation Review; early and extended learning institutions follow a candidacy pathway instead. A school logo, inherited district claim or Cognia membership badge cannot replace the registry record.

Read the present status in the vocabulary used after the 2025–2026 change: Accredited with Distinction, Accredited with Merit, Accredited, or Accredited Needing Improvement. These are performance-based accreditation statuses, not four different legal permissions to operate. Cognia states that initial accreditation is a two-year term and continuing accreditation a six-year term. The review record, scope and improvement requirements still need to be joined to the learner’s actual school, programme and dates.

This guide was checked on 29 October 2026 against current primary guidance. Cognia sources checked on 29 October 2026 include its current accreditation route, July 2025 revised policies, 2026 Impact Report and October 2025 status announcement. The four performance statuses apply through Accreditation Engagement Review results and the Index of Education Quality framework. A performance status does not rank every individual learner or guarantee university admission, transfer, state approval, curriculum authorisation, immigration permission or qualification recognition.

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 Cognia record
Separate membership from accreditation
Identify the correct entry pathway
Read the Initial Accreditation review
Read the Continuing Accreditation review
Interpret the four performance statuses
Worked case: a system badge and one school
Read improvement priorities
Check government and curriculum authority
Repair an inherited or stale claim
Join the learner to the decision period
Ask the receiving organisation

1. Find the exact Cognia record

Match legal name, location, type and school or system scope.

A familiar brand or membership claim may identify the wrong entity or status.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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 institution is merely a member or holds an accreditation status.

Membership starts a relationship but does not prove accreditation.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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. Identify the correct entry pathway

Use Initial Accreditation for the applicable institution and candidacy for early or extended learning where stated.

One pathway should not be projected onto every institution type.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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 the Initial Accreditation review

Confirm Essential Requirements, review date and two-year term.

An application or review booking is not the Commission’s accreditation decision.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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. Read the Continuing Accreditation review

Confirm the Performance Standards review and six-year term.

A past initial decision cannot establish a later continuing term.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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 the four performance statuses

Preserve the exact status rather than shortening every result to accredited.

Distinction, Merit, Accredited and Needing Improvement communicate different performance findings.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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: a system badge and one school

Match the child’s school to the system scope and current registry result.

A district-level claim should not be assumed to cover an unnamed school without evidence.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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. Read improvement priorities

Keep review recommendations and monitoring requirements beside the status.

A badge without the improvement record removes part of the decision.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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. Check government and curriculum authority

Verify separate permission to operate and deliver the chosen programme.

Private accreditation does not replace public regulation or awarding-body authorisation.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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. Repair an inherited or stale claim

Reopen the registry, identify the correct entity and date the correction.

A copied badge can outlive the status or scope it once described.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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 the learner to the decision period

Preserve enrolment, attendance, completion and transcript dates.

Today’s status alone may not answer a historical learner question.

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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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 organisation

Obtain the school, university or regulator’s decision for the actual next step.

Cognia cannot compel another organisation to accept a learner or 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 Cognia school or system states the present decision in one sentence. Cognia and its Global Commission, the exact school or system, governing body, government regulator, curriculum or awarding body, receiving school or university, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the Cognia registry entry, membership and review record, Essential Requirements or Performance Standards evidence, Accreditation Engagement Review outcome, performance status, term, scope, improvement priorities, 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.

Cognia Registry
Legal school name
System name
Location
Institution type
Membership only
Initial Accreditation
Initial review date
Two-year term
Continuing Accreditation
Continuing review date
Six-year term
Accredited with Distinction
Accredited with Merit
Accredited
Accredited Needing Improvement
Scope
Improvement priorities
Government registration
Curriculum authorisation
Learner dates
Destination decision

Build an auditable decision file

Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current current Cognia Accreditation Registry entry and the school or system’s latest accreditation outcome, 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 name, location, institution type, school or system scope, membership, Initial Accreditation, two-year term, Continuing Accreditation, six-year term, review date, Accredited with Distinction, Accredited with Merit, Accredited, Accredited Needing Improvement, improvement requirements, 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 registry identity, school or system scope, review type, performance status, accreditation term, improvement requirement, campus or delivery arrangement, 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. Cognia owns its accreditation decision; the school or system owns delivery and learner records; government bodies own operating authority; curriculum and awarding bodies own their authorisations; receivers 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 name, location, institution type, school or system scope, membership, Initial Accreditation, two-year term, Continuing Accreditation, six-year term, review date, Accredited with Distinction, Accredited with Merit, Accredited, Accredited Needing Improvement, improvement requirements, 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 Cognia school or system 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 remains the same but the learner changes campus, system affiliation, programme, review period, 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 Cognia membership accreditation?

No. Membership begins the relationship; accreditation requires the applicable review and Commission decision.

What changed in 2025–2026?

Cognia began assigning four performance-based accreditation statuses.

How long is initial accreditation?

Cognia’s current public pathway states a two-year initial accreditation.

How long is continuing accreditation?

The current pathway states a six-year continuing term.

Does Accredited Needing Improvement mean unaccredited?

No. It is one of the four accreditation statuses, but it signals a lower performance tier and greater monitoring or support.

Does system accreditation cover every school automatically?

Check the exact Registry scope and named schools; do not infer coverage from branding.

Does Cognia guarantee university admission?

No. The receiving university decides admission and recognition.

What should a family save?

The registry result, review outcome, scope, status, term, learner records and destination decision.

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 American school-years guide, the institutional and programme accreditation guide, the international-school pathways guide, the United States Education guide, the WSCUC higher-education accreditation specialist. Each guide preserves the specialist owner while showing how records, qualifications and decisions connect.