State-approved degrees in the world

If we were to live and work in any country, other than America. Is it worth enrolling in a state-approved university (in America) by distance learning?

Thanks for your commets. Ralph

 

It depends. Some situations yes, others no. Mostly no, I suspect, but I don't believe this has ever been measured.

 

Almost all unaccredited (including state-approved) degrees are illegal in at least some states of the USA. The number of states making unaccredited degrees illegal has grown over the last few years and appears to still be growing. This is because the vast majority of the higher education system in the USA is accredited. It is only degree mills and a very few fringe schools that are not accredited.

 

I don't understand questions like this one. Everything is vague and conceptually mushy.

Wouldn't it make sense to have an educational objective first? By that I mean a proposed subject area and if we are talking graduate programs, some academic interests or a set of problems in mind? Shouldn't a prospective student be clear about why he or she wants to study in the first place, and if they have a degree objective, some idea of how they propose to use their degree?

Once prospective students clarify what their own personal needs are, they can use those answers to create a set of selection criteria for evaluating candidate schools.

I like a number of CA-approved schools. But each one of them serves a specialized clientele who have specific needs.

One school presents a practice-oriented curriculum to a student body heavily weighted with Buddhist monks. Another school prepares students to tackle the California state bar exam. Still another school teaches a hands-on curriculum (including lots of hours in jets) to aerospace professionals who aspire to become aircraft test pilots.

It seems to me that if a particular CA-approved school is right for you, then you will have no problem at all in explaining to other people what made you choose it. If you can't explain your choice, then the school probably isn't right for you.

And if your list of reasons turns out to be impressive stuff like 'cheap' and 'fast' and 'easy', then you might want to slow down and rethink things. Those kind of reasons aren't going to do very much to justify your school choice to skeptics.

 

I agree with Bill on this.


Some CA or State approved schools may be good for some people and useful, but the best use is to seek a RA or a NA at least for the utility if anything.

I do not feel that a State Approved school is a totally bad decision, depending on what a individual's needs are. Mine included. Not to mention names of CA schools, but the clientel or enrolled students in one in particular are accomplished individuals who are already well established in their careers and are seeking a program that will outline and allow course objectives to meet his or her needs.

Where I feel State Approved schools fall short is when they are misled to potential employers etc. Especially for those entering the work field and are not established, lack actual work experience and fail to have a good grasp on the basics of the field in general. That is where a problem lies. With having additional accreditation, it simply defines and in terms, backs up the course curriculum as a better aid to defining requirements and relevent course materials have been presented to the student to grasp the knowledge to a more defined aptitude.

My take on it.

Jonathan

 

Re: Re: State-approved degrees in the world

Sounds a bit like the 2004 Democratic presidential agenda.........

 

Re: Re: Re: State-approved degrees in the world

Wrong forum. And about half the country might disagree.

 

But correct, nevertheless.

I still maintain that State Approved programs are appropriate in at least two situations:

-The S/A degree meets some State licensure requirement; or

-There IS NO accredited D/L program in your particular field of study out there.

 

Re: Re: State-approved degrees in the world

I agree with Bill except for one point. This might be illustrated by the way I've read the title of the thread:
"State approved degrees in the WORLD" One of the things we've learned is that there are an enormous number of people throughout Asia, Africa and virtually any other area that might be considered to be "third world" that would give almost anything to obtain a US degree. Their "educational objective" is to earn enough money so that they might extract themselves and their families from oppressive poverty, etc. They care little for "educational objectives" They will "study" anything that will allow them to reach their real objectives, the survival of their family. To me, this is very much like the period in American history when immigrants would take any job, doing anything if it meant food, clothing, etc. for their families. The millions of dollars that flow into degree mills every year come from various places. Some come from those seeking a parchment to hang on the wall of their game room. It's a bit of a joke and a bit of vanity. Others are like FNHayes. They actually try to convince others that it's deserved. Still others use this piece of paper as a means of survival. To me this is akin to those who illegally cross a national border in order to find/create a better life. Are they breaking the law? You bet. Are they doing something wrong? You tell me.
Jack

 

the whole "better life" issue is irrelevant.
Recently our local big brother publicly admitted people whose income is about euro 1000/month ( say about a front desk bank clerk's income because social security is funded by employers ) are... hear me...are... POOR .
Yes and we knew it was coming, the euro, the government sh!t ( prices about doubled on EVERYTHING and big brother let it go thinking about twice the taxes he'd get yet it is still overly indebted as never before ).

Then let's talk about sob stories of illegal aliens who could live as a king with 50 or 100$ back home.
Even Lenin was so adamant to admit pure, accomplished communism would not mean people could fulfill any wishes of theirs ( whether it be "reasonable" or not ).

At least here the illegal alien flood used to be orchestrated by:
1 catholic church with a few (millions) frocks left. Since it appeared churches close up while mosquees open up ( along with some horrible, public "definitions" of their lord J* given by european educated mullahs ) they changed their mind.
2 communist party left-overs with a few million red scarves to sell..
Well, this until a few mullahs banded together to file the creation of some "islamic party", to which they all screamed rounding up, death penalty & other "heroic remedies".
3 the majority of aliens have criminal records ( publicly declared by Albania, Morocco & other countries ) and are NOT wanted home ( or wanted home ).

In the meantime multinational giants go bankruptcy with allegations of fraud in the amount of hundred BILLIONS euros.

i am addressing a general point as others did.

 

In the days when there were few U.S. higher education options beyond attending a traditional residence university, pursuing a state-approved degree may have been many peoples' only choice. Today, there are hundreds of degree programs offered at a distance, so viable options for achieving an accredited degree now exist.

Are there people who can benefit from legal non-accredited degrees? Sure, many who seek degrees for personal enrichment, professional advancement (in jobs where accredited degrees are not required) and scholarly appearance (often in the case of authors and some religious figures). Are they useful for positions in schools, colleges & universities? Generally not.

Tony Pina
Northeastern Illinois University

 

from a practical standpoint...

Although I can't speak for the entire world, in the Middle East governments maintain a list of universities and colleges that are approved, in terms of recognizing the degree which a person holds. For example, in the UAE, there are many schools in the U.S. (even RA) that the UAE gov't will not pay for scholarships for their citizens to attend. This is also true when checking credentials to hire folks in the educational systems here. In my case, my master's is fine, as the UAE gov't recognizes FSU as an acceptable institution by their criteria. However, once I earn my Ph.D. from Capella, it will not be, simply because it is earned at a distance.

So, in this context, it would probably be helpful to ascertain the exact criteria a specific non-U.S. gov't follows with regards to acceptable universities.

Just my two cents,
Adrienne

 

Re: from a practical standpoint...

Great advice from a real world setting!

 

Bill Huffman stated: Almost all unaccredited (including state-approved) degrees are illegal in at least some states of the USA.

I hear that getting accredited is a lengthly process; how should credible schools start out if their degrees are "automatically illegal" at least in some states? (Just curious!)

 

There are exceptions written into the laws for schools that are applying for accreditation, at least in some of the states. I don't know what the status would be in all the states where there are laws making unaccredited degree use illegal. As two specific examples, the Florida law was declared unconstitutional because the degrees would have been illegal to use according to the language of that law. Without rereading the Oregon law, I assume that the ODA would need to rule on the acceptability of the degree.

I suspect though that unaccredited degrees are used successfully about the same percentage in states with laws against them as in the other states. I believe that it has more to do with people not checking on the degrees and assuming that they are valid rather than the law. The big advantage of the law is that in any legal disagreements, the person with the unaccredited degree won't be able to sue an employer that fires them for having a bogus degree.

 

I personally don't care if a state, such as Oregon says it is illegal to say I have earned a degree from an unaccredited university, especially if I earned it! It seems to me that Oregon and Michigan have carried the point too far!

Personally, if I believe the institution has a valid process of validating learning, either through VAE, correspondence or on-line learning, and they are being somewhat conserative in their review process, I feel the states don't have a reason to complain. It takes allot of money for a university to receive accreditation. Just because they don't have an on campus program, and don't have a large library or a conventional building to house the institution, I think they should be given a chance to operate. I am not speaking about diploma mills that will sell you a degree.

Let's take the case of California Coast University, which has been in existence since 1973. Let's temporary forget that they recently received accreditation with DETC. Do we brand all their alumni criminals because they possess a degree from there. I think it is just a case of "Big Brother", interfering in the rights of their citizens.

 

They did not. This kind of error makes it simpler to dismiss your other conjectures.

 

Send 'em over to wait with the adverbs.

Declaring something a valid, process does not make it so.

 

I agree with you

 

Northcentral was successful in its bid for accreditation. SCUPS failed in its. That is telling.

The problem with state approval is that the standards often don't rise to the same level as regional accreditation. Some states have few or no standards. Others defer to the regionals. Still others do a credible job.

Just because one thing is considered better than the other doesn't indicate bias. Perhaps there are reasons why, taken as a whole, employers prefer degrees from accredited schools.

Excelsior does not award credits nor degrees for experiential learning.

Stressing that accreditation is "strictly voluntary" tends to make it sound like a "take it or leave it" proposition. Nothing could be further from the truth. While schools in some states may be allowed to operate legally without accreditation, no one should expect those schools to award degrees with comparable recognition. Things just don't work that way, no matter how much some people wish they would.

I used to be a big, big fan of legitimate, unaccredited schools. That view has changed over the years, primarily because the routes to accreditation are so much more open to alternative schools. There are few exceptions to this, and little reason for any more than a handful of specialized schools to operate without accreditation. No excuse at all, and no amount of rationalization is going to change that.

When I started in this field, Capella and NCU didn't exist. Walden, Sarasota (now Argosy), Union, and Fielding weren't accredited. (Union and Fielding were candidates.) No school in the U.S. offered a 100% non-residential doctorate, and only a few offered such a degree at the master's level. And only a few more offered non-residential bachelor's degrees. DETC (NHSC then) accredited only one bachelor's-granting school. Those days are gone, and so are the excuses. Some schools, like Southwest and California Coast, recognize this and have made their bids for accreditation. The doctorate-granting schools I listed above are all now accredited. Online-only schools like AMU and Jones International are accredited, and foreign schools are delivering DL degrees to distant shores. Times have changed. Again, no excuses anymore. SCUPS recognzed that, but failed it its bid.

If you really, really believe a degree from SCUPS will meet all your present and future needs, fine. Go for it. No one around here will make fun of you or your degree. But when you find it unacceptable in many situations (and you will), please don't decry the bias. Instead, ask yourself why you chose an unaccredited school in the first place. Then be happy with your choice.