Nasty article about California Coast and Corinthian

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by John Bear, May 21, 2004.

Loading...
  1. John Bear

    John Bear Senior Member

  2. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Okay I'll admit my dirty little secret. I've never really bought into the idea that a doctorate degree from an unaccredited institution was completely bona fide. Bill Dayson almost had me convinced a few times but then the school goes and gets accredited. So I don't have much sympathy for the CCU doctorate that they were picking on.
     
  3. Dennis Ruhl

    Dennis Ruhl member

    Got to love the timing - 2 weeks from accreditation.
     
  4. Gus Sainz

    Gus Sainz New Member

    Unless you have definitive proof that they were, unquestionably, going to be granted accreditation, your comment is fallacious. Perhaps it would have been better to say, “two weeks before the earliest possible notification date of CCU being granted accreditation, IF they were to achieve this lofty goal.”
     
  5. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    You know Dennis, I love the way that Degreeinfo simultaneously has a thread applauding Bob Jones University's seeking TRACS accreditation, while running threads sneering at Cal Coast as a "diploma mill" and at its graduates as frauds with phony degrees.

    All this despite CCU seeking equally credible and recognized accreditation and qualifying the graduates of its recently discontinued doctoral program to take California's psychology board exams for licensure.

    These turn-on-a-dime scruples are positively breathtaking.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2004
  6. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I don't see that. It isn't the lack of accreditation that is getting CCU drilled around here. In fact, many (me included) have said they hope CCU is successful with DETC. But CCU is accused of tweaking its billing methods to make it possible for them to receive federal funds for students employed by the government, despite the fact that attending a school like CCU is normally not fundable. (I think they chop up the billing into small enough portions so it can be funded by a different process where accreditation isn't an issue. It looks like training instead of higher education.)
     
  7. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    :)
    Now wait a minute, just because there's a thread about a nasty article about CCU (in part) and I post to the thread, it doesn't mean that I agree with everything in the article. I'm guessing that CCU will be accredited. Was everything in the article the truth? I think it was. Was everything in the article fair? I don't think it was fair to imply that CCU was a dipoma mill but, them's there's da breaks when you're unaccredited.

    In reference to my previous post, I also note that the CCU doctorates will not be accredited.

    A final note, while the accreditation is comparable, I believe that BJU has a much better reputation than CCU.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2004
  8. Dennis Ruhl

    Dennis Ruhl member

    I have definitive proof via the grapevine. The grapevine is never wrong - is it?
     
  9. Randell1234

    Randell1234 Moderator

    What I find sad is the fact that they never mention that a CCU degree allowed her to sit for the state board to become a therapist. I think it is slanderous to call her doctorate worthless.
     
  10. Dennis Ruhl

    Dennis Ruhl member

    I'd love to see some lawsuits come out of the crap of the last couple weeks.
     
  11. Ike

    Ike New Member

    The contents of article are indeed nasty but are in point of fact truthful.
     
  12. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    One of the real dangers of an unaccredited degree is that most people will say either, "What does unaccredited mean?" or "Oh unaccredited, it must be a degree mill."
     
  13. It looks like cheap shot junk journalism to me. I'm just amazed these writers can get away with that kind of stuff, especially if Lanni has passed the state exams and is licensed in that state to practice. Cal Coast programs were approved by the Psych Board
    for registration of psychologists (once all requirements are met and state exams passed). That means the program meets the Board's criteria.

    Whether we/I like or dislike Cal Coast (or The Swan's Dr. Lanni) the artricle seems to say more about the writer than his subject. And I make my comments knowing that I wouldn't advise anyone to attend any unaccredited school.
    Earon
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    This article shows how we, the self-appointed, enlightened ones, make very fine distinctions where most others do not. We want it clearly understood that CCU isn't a diploma mill but St. Regis is. Rushmore offers worthless doctorates in business, but California Pacific should be considered. Well, it ain't so out there. We see gradations of quality, the rest of the world sees a dichotomy: schools are accredited or they're diploma mills. But they don't look carefully, hence the remarkable levels of shock we're seeing over something that's been going on for decades: diploma mills and other unaccredited schools have been awarding thousands of degrees annually, most to people who put them to use in situations where no one checks. So, for a while, they will. Then it will get quiet again.
     
  15. I appreciate the complexity Rich raises.

    (1) Accredited degrees have maximum utility and are monitored to meet the basic bar of dependable and accreditable quality. Degrees are recognised and can be traded with as a form of social currency.
    (2) Unaccredited degrees have limited utility; can run the continnuum from decent efforts approved by reasonable state programs (California), to blatant and fraudulent mills. Even with California there are questionable approved schools. There is no national system to measure quality; therefore there is no way to determine quality of any particular school, and therefore utility is questionable, usuable on a case-by case basis. Plus, state laws change as we have seen in the past; what might be considered a decent effort one decade can be seen as a blatant mill the next decade.

    I used to think that journalists actually do research. Maybe they simply reflect the public sentiment instead, and that supposedly counts as journalistic research.

    For me, it certainly brings home the need to stay far away from anything unaccredited when one considers how s/he might trade on the degree.

    Earon
     
  16. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    The entire point of the article isn't revealed until the very end;

    "Ianni told the Smoking Gun that her degree was legit "to the best of my knowledge," meaning that either California Coast officials lied to Ianni about the validity of her studies or that she dispenses advice worth of another Fox property, The O’Reilly Factor".

    Well, there it is. Going after Ianni was simply a means to take a shot at Fox.
     
  17. Randell1234

    Randell1234 Moderator

    It also sounds like her defense / explaination of her degree is almost an admission of some type of guilt. I wish she would have had a stronger comment or maybe she did and they did not print it.
     
  18. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Wow, now I get it. The Democrats are at it again, huh? :rolleyes:
     
  19. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    I never said that, Russell, why did you bring it up?

    Guilty conscience? :D
     
  20. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Indeed you didn't, Bruce. I can't imagine why I would have had such a thought.................:cool:
     

Share This Page