Glencullen PhD professor at RA university

http://www.swau.edu/academics/bulletin/pdfbulletins/0304/Faculty.pdf

 

I thought Glencullen to be a single-malt scotch.

 

This whole Glencullen, SRU, Trinity C & U is starting to look like a scary Alfred Hitchcock movie. Will the RA schools be toppled by the creatures from the unaccredited planet? Tune in next week for As the vomit flows

 

Dennis, are you not studying at an unaccredited school?[

Dennis wrote; QUOTE]Will the RA schools be toppled by the creatures from the unaccredited planet? Tune in next week for As the vomit flows [/QUOTE]

Am I the only one that finds this all a bit hypocritical? Seeing that you are such an advocate against unaccredited schools, why study at such a school, why not go to a RA school?

B.

 

Bozzy writes:

> Dennis, are you not studying at an unaccredited school?

It takes time for a college to become accredited. Dennis Ruhl is studying at a college that is pursuing DETC accreditation.

> Dennis wrote: "Will the RA schools be toppled by the
> creatures from the unaccredited planet? Tune in next week
> for As the vomit flows"

No, he didn't. Roy Savia wrote that. Dennis Ruhl and Roy Savia both live in Canada, but they are different people.

> Am I the only one that finds this all a bit hypocritical?

Yes.

 

CCU operated without applying for recognized accreditation for almost 30 years. While their current effort is admirable, let's not confuse them with a start-up school.

 

My apologies to Dennis, I could have sworn I saw his name as the poster, BUT alas the synapses were obviously misfiring.

I was wrong.

B.

 

And this guy is no less an Associate Professor of Computer Science. Well, another RA institution is being snowballed. Let's hope the avalanche doesn't continue.

John

 

Am I the only one that finds this all a bit hypocritical? Seeing that you are such an advocate against unaccredited schools, why study at such a school, why not go to a RA school?

B. [/QUOTE]

FOR THE RECORD
Dennis and I both live in Canada. Dennis is completing is MBA/DBA at CCU.

I am working on a doctorate degree through UNISA. My other degrees are from accredited schools in Canada.

I was once a student of Atlantic International University but that was long before I became a member of this forum. I learned a valuable lesson from that experience and I have no intention of getting burned again. I do not support schools that are unaccredited (except those schools that have applied for RA and DETC candidacy status).

Dennis and I have many things in common but we are not
"one in the same". In the future I ask that you please check to see which one of us has posted before you respond. Thanks.

 

Yeh we all look alike.

All my degrees are from accredited schools in Canada.

Roy you mentioned "DETC candidacy." Unplug the fan, I hear Rich's footsteps.

 

This is funny. But I didn't even notice it until you pointed it out.

For those not familiar with DETC's process--and as Dennis infers--DETC has no candidacy status. Schools are unaccredited or accredited. DETC lists schools that are applying, but no inference of quality should be drawn.

Regarding CCU's chances for accreditation, we simply don't know. They could be a stone-cold lock, or they may be rejected. But I find it hard to believe that CCU, with its obviously successful business model, would drop its doctoral programs for no reason. I'm pretty sure THEY think they'll get it. Without some insider's insight, who's to argue? We'll see.

 

DETC has accredited the matchbook correspondence school and the computer institute that defrauded potential students right up to the day that their accreditation was announced. I'd personally be very surprised if they didn't accredit CCU. Like Rich says, CCU appears serious about this so if they don't make it this round, I believe that they'll make the changes required for the next round.

 

And unlike the two wonders Bill mentions, CCU dropped its unrecognized accreditation quite a few years ago.

What then-owner Tom Neal told me at the time was that the accreditor was making too many demands on them to make significant changes in their programs, and it just wasn't worth it.

What the accreditor (NAPNTSC) told me at the time was that they felt their only chance of gaining recognition from the US Dept. of Education was if they required their schools to adopt stronger academic programs.

 

The NAPNSC website fails to mention in either the "History of the NAPNSC" page or the "About Accreditation" section of the home page that they are not a recognized accreditor. They don't mention the recognition of accrediting agencies by CHEA and the USDoE, nor do they note their 7 failed attempts at USDoE recognition. I would think those would be significant.

Given all of this, it is difficult to differentiate--on the surface--any difference between NAPNSC and others, like ACI and WAUC. For those that have been around, we remember the schools the NAPNSC has accredited, reminding us of their higher standards than those other guys. But now....maybe it's time for them to go home.

 

The URL I gave above has been mysteriously inaccessible since Friday. From Google's cache:

He is still styled "Dr. Alan Williams" on the Computer Science faculty page:
http://www.cs.southwesternadventist.edu/profs.php

And here it says "Alan comes to us from Oakwood College, where he was teaching computer science", and gives a photo of him: http://www.cs.southwesternadventist.edu/news.php

Why does a Glencullen story generate much less interest than a SRU story?

 

And I Sir suggest you do the same...read the previous posts before you respond.

Bozzy wrote:

B.

 

No floating heads

Because it's just not as funny - no floating heads for example....

 

Bozzy,
I'm well aware of who posts what and when. The original error was yours not mine. Let's call it a day.

 

Mark, if I may suggest.

Probably because SRU and certain posters on this forum have a love - hate relationship and it gives them something to occupy their time. Also, SRU seems intent on establishing themselves as a bona - fide University, much to the displeasure of certain posters.

Who knows exactly why.

B.

 

And I was man enough to apologise BUT you still felt the need to expand on the point after the mistake was made and corrected.

I agree, let it rest.

B.