Skip to Main Content
Notice of Retraction
After careful and considered review of the content of this paper by a duly constituted expert committee, this paper has been found to be in violation of IEEE's Publication Principles.
We hereby retract the content of this paper. Reasonable effort should be made to remove all past references to this paper.
The presenting author of this paper has the option to appeal this decision by contacting TPII@ieee.org.
The long experience of academic program accreditation is utilized to create a similar quality assurance measures to the emerging E-learning paradigm. In this paper; we used Accreditation parameters (eleven parameters): 1. Mission and Objectives, 2. Governance and Administration, 3. Management of Quality Assurance and Improvement, 4. Learning and Teaching, 5. Student Administration and Support Services, 6. Learning Resources, 7. Facilities and Equipment, 8. Financial Planning and Management, 9. Faculty and Staff Employment Processes, 10. Research, 11. Institutional Relationships with the Community. We also used E-learning benchmarks, such as; a- Institutional Support, b-Course Development, c-Teaching/Learning, d- Course Structure, e- Student Support, f- Faculty Support, and g-Evaluation and Assessment are examined. We found that three Academic accreditation elements are not covered in the E-learning benchmarks; namely Mission and Objectives, Research, and Institutional Relationships with the Community. In this paper we established the missing elements in e-learning benchmarks to satisfy academic accreditation, and we suggested some new benchmarks to remedy this issue. The outcome of this paper is a set of new added elements to some of the seven e-learning benchmarks. Those newly found elements will make the e-learning benchmarks in alignment with the academic accreditation elements.