Legitimate Institution distinctives

This subject has been attempted in other threads, but the conversation always seems to go off in other directions and the original intent of the thread sometimes gets lost. (Not a complaint, so much... just an observation. What can I say.)

So, to the degree that it is even possible with the members of this august body who (including myself) sometimes steer these threads away from their original purposes with all the thoughtful and useful but nevertheless off-topic side chatter, I ask this group to answer the following:

Aside from accreditation by a CHEA-approved agency (when, in fact, that's the case), what, precisely, are the specific features or distinctives of legitimate institutions of higher learning which differentiate them, in objectively observable and easily provable and/or demonstrable ways, from diploma mills?

Note that accreditation (or lack thereof) by a USDOE- and/or CHEA-approved agency is not really in play, here. The question seeks to find legitimate insitution of higher learning distinctives above and beyond whether or not they have USDOE/CHEA-approved accreditation of any kind.

And, please, if possible, let's just try to stick with answering the question. I'm not saying that we shouldn't make any side comments at all, but let's see if we can keep this thread as sharp (not to be confused, necessarily, with brief) and to-the-point as possible.

By the last sentence in my previous paragraph, I'm not making a thinly-veiled complaint or smart-assed remark about anyone in these forums. Rather, I'm simply eagerly and intently seeking really thoughtful and learned commentary that is specific and on-point and doesn't veer too far off-course; and which I am then going to try to condense down into a really good, succinct, final list (which I'll post here, for everyone's benefit, of course) which may (or may not... we'll see) subsequently get used in some legislation that I've been approached to consider writing at some point later on down the road.

The undeniable fact of the matter is that I just can't think of a better group of more knowledgeable folks from which to solicit such commentary as those who hang around here. So that's what I'm doing. Thanks, in advance, for your help.

To respond to the exact same sort of question for diploma mills, please see the companion "Diploma Mill distinctives" thread that I have also started here. If you have not already done so, please respond to that thread, too, if you can.

Please try, also, to respond to my "Hallmarks of non-U.S. degree legitimacy" thread.

 

I've made a number of posts on this subject in the past.

What I do is Google schools and look at the kind of results that I get. It's impossible to predict what you will find. Each school presents its own unique picture. I don't think that it's possible to quantify this stuff and the weight that you decide to give each item is up to you. That's why I don't think that this can be reduced to an algorithm and prefer to call it educational aesthetics. But you get a good idea about what a school is up to, of who is talking about it and about what they are saying.

I'll use University of the West/Hsi Lai University as my example and provide some examples of the kind of hits that come up for what, in my opinion, is a superior state-approved school.

Attract an international-class scholar to be your university President:

http://www.hlu.edu/uwest1/president.html

Get involved in scholarly collaborations:

http://cess.fas.harvard.edu/cesr/html/CESR_02_3.html

Have people off doing fellowships at Harvard:

http://www.hds.harvard.edu/cswr/research/ecology/bio_kjellberg.html

Have real physical facilities:

http://www.hlu.edu/Photo_Documentary/Campus_Picture/CampusPics.htm

Have the Vice President of the United States drop by your temple complex and get embroiled in a fundraising scandal:

http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Reln260/HsiLai.htm

Have CSU Fullerton list some of your classes (scroll down to CPRL 301 Sanskrit) in their own class schedule as joint offerings:

http://hss.fullerton.edu/comparative/2004_class_sched_fall.htm

Provide an advisor to an interreligious dialogue project at Harvard:

http://www.pluralism.org/about/yifa/index.php

Officiate at major international events:

http://www.wfn.org/2000/12/msg00077.html

Host conferences:

http://www.monasticdialog.com/bulletins/71/nunsinthewest.htm

Present at conferences:

http://www.unesco.org/culture/dialogue/religion/html_eng/uzbekistan4.shtml

Have an impressive faculty:

http://www.hlu.edu/academics/religion/faculty.html

Offer a course lineup as comprehensive as anything offered by the ivy league:

http://www.hlu.edu/academics/religion/course_description.html

Write books:

http://www.human.toyogakuen-u.ac.jp/~acmuller/articles/patterns.htm

Have other schools get foundation grants so that their students can do internships at your school:

http://0-www.oxy.edu.oasys.lib.oxy.edu:80/news/articles/021126-lilly.html

Attract interesting students from around the world:

http://www.myanmar.gov.mm/myanmartimes/no85/Timeouts/3a.htm

Become a candidate for regional accreditation:

http://www.wascweb.org/senior/Report_of_Actions0602.pdf

 

Haveing the majority of your offices and academic facilities co-located.

Having sufficent faculty to support the program offerings that you make.

Having a phone/fax/address where somebody actual works and answers the calls.

 

Good stuff! But think in terms of legislation, folks. How do I define an "acceptable" institution of higher-learning -- even if it's unaccredited by a regional agency -- which definition could end-up in statutory language?

I'm not asking anyone here to write legalese. I'm just trying to get a list of things which define a legitimate degree-granting institution.

For example, one Alan has mentioned elsewhere: That not more than 25% of the credit hours for any given degree are granted for prior or life experience.

Stuff like that.

 

What is wrong with 25% 50% or even more? I think I read that Dr. Levicoff did a majority of his undergraduate via portfolio credit didn't I?

I do not think there is anything wrong with giving college credit for experience, but it should be done properly. Experience credit should be assessed, evaluated, verified, or proven in some way rather than just given because it is claimed. This is what puts unaccredited schools in the substandard or diploma mill category when they have these practices.

IMO, legitimate schools should share the same minimum standards as accredited schools for each degree program. Creative ways to meet these standards such as portfolio assessment, testing out, projects, papers, online courses, and independent study should be used, but the standards should not be bypassed or short changed.

 

In the absence of generally accepted accreditation, we have to make our decisions based on whatever information is available, and what that evidence might be is difficult to predict in advance.

"Acceptable" to whom? What kind of statute?

If you are looking for a single set of widely recognized standards, then ask the accreditors. They have already written standards in greater detail than we could and have far more experience applying them.

But if you want to move beyond the existing accreditors and "think outside the box", then you probably need to entertain the possibility that a single set of standards won't fit all legitimate schools.

That particular criterion would dismiss Thomas Edison State College, Charter Oak State College, Excelsior College and Western Governor's University as illegitimate.