The question of accreditation has been quite controversial in higher education. Some consider accreditation as a necessary "evil" while others reject it outright. It is a process designed to promote quality assurance and improvement in institutions and programs, yet one mired in various issues. While accreditation is controversial in a number of respects, the major focus of accrediting bodies should be the review of applied professional programs at both undergraduate and graduate levels that are grounded in professional standards and licensure. Basic science programs such as movement, exercise, and sport science should be excluded from accreditation review and subject only to external review by experts within the field of kinesiology. Furthermore, amongst other factors, the association of kinesiology programs with agencies that promote the accreditation of programs that lack professional standards, certification, or licensure should be rejected. Accreditation is here to stay, but how well it serves the academy remains debatable.