NA vs RA

Why national accreditation not as good as regional accreditation?

 

<<Why national accreditation not as good as regional accreditation?>>

I think it would be a mistake to say that NA is "not as good" as RA.

RA is certainly more widely recognized and accepted. RA is older, it's been around longer, it's more well known than the NA agencies. That said, depending on what you want to do, NA may be sufficient, or in some cases, even preferred. For example, many churches prefer their pastors have credentials from the AABC or ATS (both NA) rather than RA schools.

Pug

 

Why some RA institutions not accept NA?

 

Until very recently, national accreditors busied themselves with non-academic schools. Trade schools, correspondence courses, even a few non-academic associate's degrees. In 1980, for example, DETC accredited just one bachelor's-granting school (Grantham). The national's have only a very recent track record in accrediting academic schools, and the schools themselves tend to be very new. There is ample reason for regionally accredited schools to maintain their non-acceptance policies.

That said, are there regionally accredited schools that will accept credits and degrees from nationally accredited schools? Certainly. In 2000, John Bear conducted a survey (presented to the 2001 AACRAO convention) of admissions officials. He reports that about 20% said they would accept such credits and degrees, another 20% said they'd consider it.

Is this changing? Maybe. But no one has measured it.

 

<<Why some RA institutions not accept NA?>>

Good question. This issue is one that annoys MANY people. CHEA recommends that credits earned at NA schools transfer to RA schools, but most RA schools still disallow it. Why? I'm not sure. My personal opinion is that their is a lot of prejudice out there. RA schools are kind of a "good ole boys" club and they don't want anyone else to play in their club house. Many RA schools are starting to change this policy. Many more have not officially changed the policy but they make exceptions "on a case by case basis." Still others have cooperative agreements with NA schools, where credits earned at NA school "A" will transfer into a degree program from RA school "B." It's very confusing.

To add to this confusion and mess, let me give you a brief example of this ridiculousness as it applies in the real world:

To become a teacher in the state of Maryland, one must hold a BA in any field from a RA school, then must complete a small certification program (if the BA itself did not lead to certification). In other words, one could earn a BA in Basket Weaving from an RA school, complete a teacher certification program, and teach. Here's where it gets strange: Let's take two students, each complete a BA in General Studies from XYZ University, which is RA. They each take the exact same classes. Student 1 completes all of his/her courses from XYZ University. Student 2 takes 30 hours at a NA school but later transfers to XYZ University to complete the degree program. Student 1 graduates with a 2.0 average. Student 2 graduates with a perfect 4.0 average. They both apply to the Maryland Teacher Certification Program, degrees and transcripts in hand. Student 1 (with the 2.0 average) gets admitted into the program and becomes a teacher. Student 2 (with the 4.0 average) gets denied and is not eligible to teach because all 30 credits he earned at the NA school are not recognized.

Ridiculous? Yes, and sadly it is also true.

Pug

 

Then it seems quite risky to take DETC degree, right?

 

This is a very vague conclusion. My research showed a lower level of acceptance of DETC-accredited degrees by U.S. employers.

(That is a more specific conclusion, but it doesn't enjoy the broad, sweeping, general nature of yours.)

Again, I suggest you check with potential employers regarding the acceptability of any degree program you contemplate.

 

I've received reply from a Hong Kong University, it answered that it will accept, yet, I still afraid they will see it not as good as RA one.

Since for Hong Kong's Universities, they also require prospective students with RA degree (if the degree is earned from US)

Then, I send an email to the admission office, it said that DETC degree will also be accepted.

 

I totally agree with Rich on this issue. I have no official research to back it up, but from my own experiences I can tell you that the graduate schools I contacted were more receptive to allowing admission with BA degrees earned from the AABC or TRACS than they were BA degrees earned from the DETC. Incidentally, which DETC are you looking at? Which program?

Pug

 

<<I've received reply from a Hong Kong University, it answered that it will accept, yet, I still afraid they will see it not as good as RA one.

Since for Hong Kong's Universities, they also require prospective students with RA degree (if the degree is earned from US)

Then, I send an email to the admission office, it said that DETC degree will also be accepted.>>


So you are looking to use this degree for admission to a graduate program. What field does the BA have to be in? Depending on your requirements, a RA degree might even be less expensive than a DETC degree.

Pug

 

If acceptance were widened out to include accepting all kinds of alternative standards as well, then the whole point of the original standards would be subverted. They would no longer be the standards of acceptance.

The situation would either be 'anything-goes', which means that no standards exist, or it would imply the existence of some unstated but nevertheless required meta-standard that all the alternative accreditation standards somehow satisfy.

Then people would set to work arguing about that.

 

Shirley,

Rich is always correct in the utility of the degree affecting your choice. I have both RA and DETC ( and the DETC school had a Hong Kong campus) degrees. In my circumstances the degrees work ( I am currently in a RA PhD program) I would recommend you start at your end goal and work backwards. At any point along this process you may find that a NA degree is unsuitable and can make your decision based upon this information. If you could let us know what programs, etc... I believe the forum can provide some good solutions.

I had several RA universities offer to accept some or most of the credits in varying amounts or waiver prerequisite requirements towards a PhD or another Masters.

Regards,

 

<<Because regional accreditation defines the standards that most American universities accept. That sounds circular, but it isn't.

If acceptance were widened out to include accepting all kinds of alternative standards as well, then the whole point of the original standards would be subverted. They would no longer be the standards of acceptance.

The situation would either be 'anything-goes', which means that no standards exist, or it would imply the existence of some unstated but nevertheless required meta-standard that all the alternative accreditation standards somehow satisfy.

Then people would set to work arguing about that.

My point is that there is either a standard or there isn't. If there is a standard, it's gotta be drawn somewhere and it's probably going to look arbitrary to those who would draw the line elsewhere.>>


Bill,

I agree that there must be an absolute standard. How do the academic standards differ between the RA agencies and say, AABC/TRACS/ATS/DETC? I am under the impression from CHEA that the academic standards are largely the same between these agencies.

Pug

 

Pug,

CHEA agrees and put the following out several years ago:

http://www.chea.org/pdf/transfer_state_02.pdf

pretty good document but ultimately it is up to the accreditors to work amongst themselves.

Take a good look at the committee members. Kind of makes me wonder what they really took away from the committee to put into practice.

 

<<pretty good document but ultimately it is up to the accreditors to work amongst themselves.>>

Yup. Unfortunately most RA schools ignor the recommendations. Most RA schools have a blanket rejection policy of NA credits and a blanket acceptance policy of RA credits...exactly what CHEA suggests should NOT be the case.

Pug

 

I'm not even sure what the words "academic standards" mean. All I can do is give my own personal unscientific opinion.

I'd place AABC, TRACS and DETC at a sub-RA level. I'd probably put ACICS at the same level. Probably ACCSCT goes there too.

Why? Mainly from the line-up of schools that each one accredits. Compare the best WASC school (Cal Tech? Stanford?) with the best DETC or TRACS school. While there's clearly some overlap, the best NA schools resemble the weakest RA schools more than they do the better ones. But that's just my own subjective opinion.

I'm more impressed with ATS, mostly because it typically serves as a specialized programmatic accrediter of theology programs offered by RA schools. I'm inclined to see it as more of a peer with AACSB and its ilk.

But you have to factor in the respective distinctives. Each of the NA accreditors seems to have its own specialty niche. If you are specifically looking for a theologically conservative Protestant Bible college and doctrinal issues are very important to you, then AABC or TRACS might become much more prominent. Those schools would definitely repel me, but they might be just what somebody else is looking for.

 

<<I'm not even sure what the words "academic standards" mean. All I can do is give my own personal unscientific opinion.

I'd place AABC, TRACS and DETC at a sub-RA level. I'd probably put ACICS at the same level. Probably ACCSCT goes there too.

Why? Mainly from the line-up of schools that each one accredits. Compare the best WASC school (Cal Tech? Stanford?) with the best DETC or TRACS school. While there's clearly some overlap, the best NA schools resemble the weakest RA schools more than they do the better ones. But that's just my own subjective opinion.

I'm more impressed with ATS, mostly because it typically serves as a specialized programmatic accrediter of theology programs offered by RA schools. I'm inclined to see it as more of a peer with AACSB and its ilk.

But you have to factor in the respective distinctives. Each of the NA accreditors seems to have its own specialty niche. If you are specifically looking for a theologically conservative Protestant Bible college and doctrinal issues are very important to you, then AABC or TRACS might become much more prominent. Those schools would definitely repel me, but they might be just what somebody else is looking for.>>

Interesting perspective. As far as accredited schools, I have attended a local community college (RA), LSU (RA), Eugene Bible College (NA/AABC), and Briercrest (NA/AABC). I felt all were quality schools in their own way. Based on a combination of rigor, quality of materials, student/faculty interaction, and the overall learning experience, I would rait them as follows:

Bottom - The Community College
Next rung up - Eugene Bible College and LSU, tied.
Top - Briercrest, hands down leader of the pack.

For another perspective, my wife attended Nazareth College for 3 years. Nazareth is a highly respected private school (RA) in New York. She has also attended a community college, LSU, and has seen all of the Briercrest materials/requirements/faculty interaction from my involvement with them. She would also rait her community college experience at the bottom (not suggesting it was bad), would rait LSU a solid 2nd, and would place Briercrest on the same level as Nazareth.

So what does this mean? I'm not sure. It could mean that neither of us have attended good RA schools, although unlikely because of the Nazareth factor. It could mean that LSU is a bottom-tier RA school and Eugene Bible College is its NA equivalent. It could mean that Briercrest is an exceptional NA school. More likely, in my opinion, is that on a broad scale, the quality between NA and RA schools is extremely comparable (at least AABC schools). Within the quality scale there would be obvious standouts, both RA and NA, both positive and negative.

Pug

 

Has anyone else attended both NA and RA schools that would like to offer an opinion?

Pug

 

===

I think the discipline studied, the commitment of the student to that study at that particular time, and the degree level it is studied at might have very much to do with this topic. But aside from that, assuming that standards are correlative to difficulty level, this is the memory and perception of my experience in three sets:


Most Difficult:

Unizul research- GAAP
Western Seminary RA/ATS


Moderately Difficult:

Point Loma Nazarene-RA
Trinity Seminary-unaccredited
American CC/Seminary(was) NA


Not Difficult:

University of San Diego-RA
Oregon State University (except statistics) -RA
Linda Vista-unaccredited

Of course, since my age keeps going up, and since what I perceive as the more difficult is the more recent, perhaps it is just that my abilities are going down.

 

I've done a smattering (the word bothers me) of everything. Order from toughest to easiest.

1. Distances courses (4) from a Canadian accounting association
2. Classroom courses (50) from a Canadian university
3. Distance courses (7) from an unaccredited school (at the time) with an R/A transfer agreement
4. Distance course from an R/A university.
5. Distance courses (4) from an unaccredited university.
6. Distance courses (many) from an unaccredited religious school.

As these courses are a whole mix of subject areas with some totally technical and some humanities a direct comparison may be meaningless. The airier fairier the course, the farther down the list. Technical stuff requires actually knowing the material.