Accredited vs unaccredited degree programs

Being one who is new to this forum I cannot claim to be familiar with all of its subtleties and intricacies. But one doesn’t need to be a rocket surgeon to see that one of the largest issues of controversy is that of accredited vs unaccredited degree programs. It would also seem that the state of Oregon has an almost pathological obsession to have all unaccredited and/or non-traditional schools put out of business, and all degrees conferred by them declared to be fraudulent and illegal.

Some of the best legal minds in Nashville belong to graduates of The Nashville School of Law. Which was originally founded in 1911, and until 1986 was known as The Y.M.C.A. Night Law School. While The Nashville School of Law operates with the consent of the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners, it is unaccredited by the American Bar Association. Therefore, as an unaccredited school its graduates are limited to practicing only in Tennessee unless they have passed bar exams in other states and have become licensed by those states. Some states recognize this school, while others do not. Let us suppose for a moment that a federal law were passed declaring that only graduates of ABA accredited law schools could practice law. And that faced with its having to choose between making those changes in its programs and procedures necessary to become accredited by the ABA or going out of business, The Nashville School of Law chose the latter and closed its doors. Under the Oregon law, or proposed law as I understand it, all practicing attorneys and sitting judges who obtained their Tennessee law licenses based upon their unaccredited Y.M.C.A. or Nashville School of Law degrees would be out of work, and possibly be prosecuted for obtaining licenses to practice law by using fraudulent law school diplomas.

Carrying this scenario a step further, should I also be required to surrender my commercial pilot’s license, instrument, and flight instructor ratings because I did not obtain them through an accredited flight school? I think not. Rather, I did so with only a minimum of dual instruction and flight supervision. I acquired the significantly larger part of my flight experience and all of my ground schooling through what is sometimes called “self-study” and “life learning experience.” Now that I think about it, that sounds similar to the philosophy behind non-traditional colleges and universities, doesn’t it?

There’s a concept that I think the state of Oregon should start warming up to. That is that, like it or not, any degree that is conferred by any college or university, accredited or unaccredited, traditional or non-traditional, that is operating at the time under the supervision and authority properly conferred by its state’s appropriately designated supervising agency is deemed to be legal. I doubt that any of those states’ requirements specify or have specified, “…as long as it OK with Oregon.”

If the state of Oregon, or any others, would presume to arbitrarily, whimsically, and capriciously go about randomly choosing and designating this school or that as being illegal and fraudulent based solely upon its notion of what constitutes a legal college or university, it potentially harms the thousands who earned legal degrees over the decades by denying them the right to obtain jobs and seek promotions based upon their legally acquired degrees. Oregon does this at the risk of finding itself deluged with a glut of individual and class action lawsuits rightfully claiming discrimination, defamation, and perhaps a host of other wrongdoings. This does not take into consideration that by its actions, the state of Oregon is implying that fools and morons govern those states that allow or have allowed those legally recognized schools to operate, which are on its “degree mill” list. They may find that those states might react to such an affront by proclaiming Oregon’s state flower to be a noxious weed, and declaring year-round open season on its state bird.

 

Here we go again....

If you have anything, anything at all to support these contentions you've made (in you all two posts), please share it with us. Absent that, your opinions stand naked on their own.

 

Originally posted by DrJim
It would also seem that the state of Oregon has an almost pathological obsession to have all unaccredited and/or non-traditional schools put out of business, and all degrees conferred by them declared to be fraudulent and illegal.

The State of Oregon's laws are largely, I think, written to protect the welfare of the citizens of the state, not to effect economic policy elsewhere.

While The Nashville School of Law operates with the consent of the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners, it is unaccredited by the American Bar Association. Therefore, as an unaccredited school its graduates are limited to practicing only in Tennessee unless they have passed bar exams in other states and have become licensed by those states.

Without an independent, external review of a school (through accreditation by a legitimate accreditor), it is natural for each state to require confirmation of a graduate's mastery of the law through administration of something equivalent to a licensing exam.

Some states recognize this school, while others do not. Let us suppose for a moment that a federal law were passed declaring that only graduates of ABA accredited law schools could practice law.

That seems unlikely. And in the course of resolving the Federalist issues, one would expect the states and the federal government to seek some sort of method to recognize previously awarded legitimate credentials.

Carrying this scenario a step further, should I also be required to surrender my commercial pilot’s license, instrument, and flight instructor ratings because I did not obtain them through an accredited flight school?

The licensing procedures for pilots are generally viewed as adequate tests of competence, yes?

You could express the same concern for other licensed professions.

I acquired the significantly larger part of my flight experience and all of my ground schooling through what is sometimes called “self-study” and “life learning experience.” Now that I think about it, that sounds similar to the philosophy behind non-traditional colleges and universities, doesn’t it?


A PhD in "Educational Leadership" from a school that doesn't really exist is not offered a licensing exam before being accorded promotion in a public school system. There is no mechanism to check that the new doctor actually learned anything in the course of acquiring the credential.

There’s a concept that I think the state of Oregon should start warming up to. That is that, like it or not, any degree that is conferred by any college or university, accredited or unaccredited, traditional or non-traditional, that is operating at the time under the supervision and authority properly conferred by its state’s appropriately designated supervising agency is deemed to be legal.

Like Hamilton University, licensed by Wyoming. Like Saint Regis, "operated by the National Board of Education, Inc., an International Business Corporation" which (it seems) no longer exists.

If the state of Oregon, or any others, would presume to arbitrarily, whimsically, and capriciously go about randomly choosing and designating this school or that as being illegal and fraudulent...

But the list is not random. Read the criteria for inclusioon in the list posted on the ODA site.

Oregon is implying that fools and morons govern those states that allow or have allowed those legally recognized schools to operate, which are on its “degree mill” list.

At most the implication is likely to be that Oregon got around to confronting the problem sooner than most states.

G

 

Re: Re: Accredited vs unaccredited degree programs

Yes - here we go again.



Rich - "WHERE ARE ALL THE LAWSUITS?! Nowhere, of course."

Me - Where are all the prosecutions? That would be none. Apparently the state attorney general does not believe they could actually win a case. A toothless tiger!



All unaccredited Oregon schools get exemption even though I doubt that Oregon is more stringent than most other states. Sounds like restraint of trade. Isn't that a federal crime? The ODA as a criminal organization???


Naked opinion? - As opposed to clothed opinion? - Is one worse?

 

I think that it makes some sense to redefine the controversy in terms of academic credibility and degree utility. Accreditation provides socially recognized evidence of the former, greatly increasing the latter.

I think that the Oregon legislature didn't want academically worthless degrees passed in their state. I see nothing "pathological" about that, it's a worthy goal.

Oregon defers to the judgement of the US Department of Education recognized accreditors. That's not "capricious" or "random".

If a graduate of a non-accredited degree-granting school wants to work in Oregon, it's possible to have the school that granted the degree checked out to verify that it equates to OR-approval standards.

 

If some of the "best legal minds in Nashville" are lawyers, and since Nashville is the Capital of Tennessee, would it be too much of a stretch to assume that some of them are in politics, especially since most politicians are lawyers? If that is not too fanciful assumption, why would you then assume that the politicians (many of who are some of the best and brightest lawyers would vote against themselves?

BTW, Tennessee is not the only state that allows non-ABA graduates to sit for the bar. look a California.

And as others have said, what the heck does a law school in Tennessee have to do with a consumer protection agency in Oregon? Except that the degrees may not be acceptable in Oregon (wait -- just took a look (http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html)-- not listed, so the degree can be used).

So your worry over the ODA ruling against The Nashville Law School is not real. Rest easy the degree is valid.

 

You make statments that you try to attribute to the ODA that have NEVER been made.

The ODA only claims to make decisions for Oregon, no where else.

Your apparent assertion that the ODA will rule against all unaccredited schools is proven false by the 12 schools that they do approve.

It is also false that legally acquired means that the degree meets the standard level. If it doesn't meet the standard level then it is well within the right of society and all fair minded individuals to say that it is unfair to accept non-stanard degrees.

 

Re: Re: Re: Accredited vs unaccredited degree programs

I believe that your exaggeration is irrelevant and misses the point. The hard legal point of the law is not that the legislature or the ODA thinks that they're going to fill up the jails with academic frauds. Your degree mill loving buddies, love this silly exaggeration don't they? You are repeating it because? The point is that in Oregon any civil suit involving these unaccredited degrees will probably be clarified tremendously. Another point that seems to be ignored, I would like to think that most people, even most potential academic frauds would think twice before deciding to knowingly break the law. Another fun point is that no longer can KWU stalk Oregon victims because of your "toothless tiger". The most fun point though is that I get to tell academic frauds that they would be breaking the law in Oregon.

Silly rabbit, Tricks are for kids. If there was a school that was operating illegally in Oregon then it would be operating illegally. Duh!