The Congress of the USA and the universities without accreditation

Hello friends, excuse my English

Please friends, explain this to me, like a 5 years old kid, but with LEGAL FACTS or ACADEMIC FACTS


Why if the degrees of the universities without accreditation (registered or licensed by a state) as Pacific Western University, Preston University, British-American University, etc. are so bad, without value and illegal in some states (Illegal, because the Federal Supreme Court has not solved this controversy )

Why the Congress of the United States of America, does not create a law that prohibits these institutions, or, create a law that establish that the accreditation agencies give the permission of operating or create the universities?

Excuse my English, I am writing from Puerto Rico

M.A. Caribbean University of Puerto Rico-Criminal Justice
B.A. American University of Puerto Rico-Criminal Justice

 

Nearly everyone here would agree that Congress should be doing more.

One difficulty is that many Americans feel that education should be entirely a state, rather than a federal, responsibility. In 1980, Ronald Reagan ran for president with the promise that if he were elected, he would abolish the US Department of Education.

The way accreditation works in the US, all newly created schools are unaccredited. The accreditors study the school's processes before they grant the accreditation.

 

I don't.

 

Espero que esto lo ayude.

Dispense por favor mi español. Utilizo una máquina para traducir mi inglés en el español. Yo no estoy segura cuán exacta esta máquina será. Tan si mi español es desaliñado -- ¡Ahora usted sabe por qué! Si usted quiere ver la máquina que utilizo, entonces haga clic aquí.

Los usos de Estados Unidos "accreditors regional" acreditar los colegios y las universidades legítimos. Los Estados Unidos son rotos en seis regiones -- Tan hay seis accreditors regional en los Estados Unidos.

"Ser acreditado regionalmente" es muy importante para un colegio o la universidad en los Estados Unidos. El accreditors regional asegura que los colegios y las universidades mantengan un nivel mínimo de "los estándares académicos." Las escuelas eso no "son acreditados regionalmente" son considerados para ser inferior. Aquí está la mejor ilustración que puedo pensar en:

• Una escuela que no es acreditado es regionalmente equivalente a un motor menos bicicleta o un peatón.
  
• Una escuela que se acredita regionalmente es equivalente a un coche o un chorro.

Otras escuelas regionalmente acreditadas no reconocerán una escuela que no es acreditado regionalmente. Ser acreditado regionalmente es el “patrón oro” para las escuelas que se operan y son establecido dentro de los Estados Unidos. Si usted quiere saber por qué el seis accreditors regional es, entonces haga clic aquí.

Eso es la manera que lo está en los Estados Unidos. Eso es cómo mantenemos y aseguramos "los estándares académicos."

< los hombros de encogimientos de hombros >

Casualmente, soy un policía norteamericano.

 

Re: Espero que esto lo ayude.

Me again, That was pretty good!

Cheers!

Vini

 

Distinguido e ilustre amigo:


No es necesario que se disculpe por su ingles, el mio tampoco es bueno, ya la gente en el forum estan mas o menos familiarizado contingo.

Bueno, hacer una ley que prohibe este tipo de institucion podria ser anti-constitucional, no puede haber una ley que diga por que esta universidad o escuela no este acreditada es ilegal. Las leyes han ido mejorando en algunos estados. Y como otros han mencionados, todas las universidades comenzaron sin accreditacion. Las Universidades que mencionastes no es que no sean malas sino que la utilidad es menor que otros circulos. Yo tengo dos grados de una universidad de California, pero no lo uso para nada, solo me ayudaron para poder hacer lo que estoy haciendo ahora, mejorar mi ingles, mi entimiento de como funciona la universidades aqui. La educacion fue muy buena apezar de que no es acreditada.

Espero que esto le aclare un poco las cosas<

Vini

 

If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what's the opposite of "progress"?

 

I don't know if I would welcome the US Congress into this problem. While I have been an outspoken critic non-RA schools, and would like to see the confusion eliminated, I would fear the politicalization of a federal solution.

The current system of accreditation is based on academics. A fereral law would involve debates in congress on what constitutes a legitimate university. The outcome could result in, for instance, unaccredited Bible colleges being recognized nationally as legitimate degrees.

If congress did get involved, which I doubt it ever will, the best solution would be to utilize the current system. Simply declare that only RA colleges and universities could issue bacheolor's, master's, and doctorates. Unaccredited schools could issue certificates, diplomas, or anything other than degrees.

Just my opinion.

 

I believe that the federal government has no authority in the matter.

If we tell Police that a state approved degree is fine for all purposes, maybe we won't get the same spiel every month.

Then when he gets fired for having an unapproved degree, he can blame other people.

I enrolled in an unaccredited doctoral program all on my own, with advice to the contrary from many at degreeinfo. Police can do the same. It's he that has to live with any future consequences, not us, but enough is enough.

 

Are there any "institutions like Bob Jones University"? BJU is 1 of only 3 Oregon-approved unaccredited schools, and dissimilar to the other 2:
http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html

A school that wants to confer non-religious degrees should be willing to submit to external validation. BJU might close, but the National Test Pilot School would submit to accreditation if it had to.

I doubt Plumbdog10's "best solution" is feasible. Could Congress restrict use of the word "degree" without a constitutional amendment? Could the Regional Accreditors do their current preliminary assessment if the candidate institutions were not allowed to award degrees? What protection would there be against offshore mills?

Congress could study state laws such as Oregon's to see what's feasible federally. They could also direct the FBI to revive DipScam, and then consider what additional powers prosecutors might need.

 

The only thing I liked about him with the exception of picking Schweiker as his running mate in 1976 before even getting the GOP nod.

 

Notwithstanding the above, it should be pointed out that the Schwenkfelder Church, of which Richard Schweiker is the only relatively famous member, is actually a real denomination and currently functioning. It is very tiny and has close ties to the United Church of Christ. It has no seminary or college. Its primary higher educational institution is the Schwenkfelder Library, a real library run by real people doing real scholarly and also genealogical research; the Schwenkfelder Library does not offer degrees and never has done so.

This post is parenthetical and prophylactic; please return, subsequent posters, to the theme of this thread. Best wishes.

 

Are there any "institutions like Bob Jones University"? BJU is 1 of only 3 Oregon-approved unaccredited schools, and dissimilar to the other 2:
school that wants to confer non-religious degrees should be willing to submit to external validation.

Do you think that Oregon lists all academically sound non-accedited colleges/universities? If that is the case, you may have a good point. If there is only 3, maybe your proposal could be workable (a different thing than saying it should be done).

Now about those offering religious degrees, must they be accredited to continue to issue degrees? On what basis would they be exempt if not? I know of some fine seminaries that are not accredited but are very academically sound.

 

I believe that I understand the spirit in which our DL colleague Police posts the original question in this thread. I also think that more could be done to eliminate this problem. However, I also think it's naive to believe that having Congress pass some new law(s) means that the problem will go away. There are lots of laws against drugs. Drug use, drug possession, drug sale, drug tansport, etc. and yet there is still a drug problem (perhaps bigger than ever).
Like the drug problem, the bogus degree problem is a demand problem , not a supply problem. If there were not a demand for such a product then the degree mills would wither and die within a relatively short time. My point is this. You can pass all the laws you like but it won't seriously effect the problem. The schools will simply move abroad and out of reach. BTW, where is Knightsbridge really located?
Jack

 

I strongly agree. Besides, enacting a federal solution would raise Constitutional questions.

If an attempt was made to create a single monolithic standard, there would be argument and disputes even if everyone restricted themselves to purely educational issues.

I suppose that something like the current system could be maintained, with a number of different private accrediting associations doing the accreditation work, but with an added section of the US Code outlawing any higher education institution not acredited by one of the USDoEd recognized accreditors (or on an accreditation track in the case of new schools).

Actually, many states have passed laws very similar to that already.

But as for myself, I like California's rather looser system. I like how the state embraces small schools with fewer resources than the conventional accreditors demand, and requires significantly less paperwork. One one hand, that creates additional opportunities for abuse, and some CA-approved schools are pretty bad. But it also create the opportunity for a kind of educational entrepeneurism that one sees few other places. All over the state there are little institutes intended to study and advance every imaginable subject. Some offer things available nowhere else. A few of them are actually good.

I'd hate to see that suppressed.

There will always be a religious exemption. That would create a major loophole in any proposed government "solution".

Recognizing accreditors such as AABC, TRACS, ATS and AARTS would provide some alternatives for Christians and Jews, but other religions aren't so lucky. In California, there are several CA-approved Buddhist schools that would probably be accredited by a sectarian accreditor if only they were Christian.

If things had to be federalized, I think that a better solution would be to retain the whole range of US Department of Education recognized accreditors, including the regional accreditors, DETC (DL specific), ACICS, ACCSCT (vocational accreditors), ATS, TRACS, AABC (Christian religious accreditors of various kinds), AARTS (the rabbinical and talmudical accreditor), NASAD (art and design), NASM (music schools), AALS (liberal arts), CCE (chiropractic), ACAOM (acupuncture colleges) and many more.

I suppose that lots of people would prefer the simplicity of rolling all of these accreditors into one. No more interminable RA-DETC fights, for one thing. But it seems to me that many of these accreditors have different agendas and optimize their schools in different ways. Is general education the heart and soul of a liberal education, or is GE just a waste of time that should be replaced technical major courses? Do we want anything-goes academic freedom, or do we want statements of faith and doctrinal tests from students and faculty?

I prefer a system in which different incompatible visions of what higher education should be can coexist without one suppressing all of the others. All I ask is that all of them be academically defensible.

 

Well, Oregon seems to approve Trinity which has been considered a degree mill by many on here. Maybe approved isn't the correct word.

 

Sorry Jimmy, you need to read it again. No way does the ODA approve Trinity.

 

Don't be sorry I appreciate being corrected. I guess I misunderstood this statement "...to offer specific degrees with exclusively religious titles approved by the ODA...

 

Hello me again

The translator that you use is good; I can understand your words. I am also a police officer; I work in the Municipal Police of San Juan like a sergeant.

Now thanks to the Dr. Bear and to the friends of Degree Info, I can basically, understand the situation of the accreditation agencies. In addition, the friends of Degree Info, saved me to register in a university that operates legally under the laws of the USA, but do not have the voluntary accreditation.

However, like student of criminal justice, I cannot understand the discrimination against the universities without accreditation (licensed or registered in the states) that operates legally under the laws of the USA.

I believe that in the future, states like Oregon are going to have to defend their position in the Supreme Court of the USA, since it can be dangerous to catalogue a degree of a university that operates legally under the laws of the USA, like, illegal.
Since the accreditation, is a voluntary process, according to the federal government.

For that, reason, I think, that the Congress of the USA or the Supreme Court of the USA must establish what is the correct thing, since they have the LEGAL POWER, to be able to regulate the education in the USA.


Hola Vinipink
Creo que estudiamos en la misma universidad en P.R.

Gracias por la aclaración, sin embargo, no puedo comprender el discrimen contra las universidades sin acreditación que operan legalmente bajo las leyes de USA.

¿Crees que sea peligroso discriminar contra una persona que tenga un titulo de una universidad sin acreditacion pero que opera legalmente bajo las leyes de USA?



M.A. Caribbean University of Puerto Rico-Criminal Justice
B.A. American University of Puerto Rico-Criminal Justice