Warren National (formerly Kennedy-Western) appears to be in trouble

From the Chronicle of Higher Education:

August 25, 2008
A Mysterious Silence Emanates From Warren National U.

Warren National University appears to be in trouble.

A note on its Web site says the institution has “suspended, until further notice, the admission or reactivation of students into our degree programs.” What this means for current students is unclear.

Warren National, which is unaccredited, has an interesting history. Previously known as Kennedy-Western University, it has moved from Idaho to California to its current home, Wyoming. It received some unwelcome publicity in 2004, when it and several other unaccredited institutions were the subjects of an investigation by the General Accounting Office. It later changed its name to Warren National.

For the past few days, the university’s Web site has been down. The note blames the decision on “economic uncertainty.” Multiple calls to the university today went to employees’ voice-mail. Even the campus operator failed to answer. —Thomas Bartlett

 

How will that decision affect their application for regional accreditation?

 

While no fan of Kennedy-Western University or Warren National University their web site clearly states "Warren National University is scheduled on October 13-15, 2008 to undergo a comprehensive evaluation for Candidacy Status by an evaluation Team representing The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools." (Warren National University Accreditation Status). Maybe WNU is focusing on preparations for the upcoming accreditation visit.

 

my prediction: dead in the water

 

Their web site is up and running - I do not see any of the notices reported above.
http://www.wnuedu.com/

 

I just checked their website as well. It was up, and the following notice was posted near the bottom of their home page. You might have to scroll down to see it.

 

I suspect they're serious about becoming accredited, but are so awful they can't keep doing what they're doing--what they've been doing for the last 25 years. It's too far from here to there.

The previous concern was how "grandfathered" K-WU grads would be. Now it shifts to WNU grads who did their degrees under what is clearly insufficient circumstances.

 

I would agree. I am a graduate and I contacted the school. I was informmed that the University is seeking accredidation. I was told that at this time they were making changes improve their chances of being approved. I was also told that in the future, alumni would be welcome to re-enroll and take further classwork so that their degrees would be accredited as well.

I guess I assume good faith on their part.

 

My guess is that the owner/administration had deluded themselves into believing that their practices were closer to accreditation standards than they actually were. If the owner wants to start up a real school that is to become accredited, he should start from scratch. I think it would be best for the public good if WNU quietly closed their doors and were never heard from again.

 

I agree, and I think that if it quietly closed its doors and the owner went into a completely different line of work, that would be even better

 

Chip: "I agree, and I think that if it quietly closed its doors and the owner went into a completely different line of work, that would be even better."

Well, with a doctorate from Indiana Northern University, the pride of Gas City, the world is his oyster.

 

The WNU accreditation FAQs now include the following statement:

All RA schools begin as unaccredited institutions. But such schools typically operate in compliance with RA standards from the start, even before they get formally accredited.

So the accreditation agencies give the schools "credit" for this. Most newly-accredited schools are allowed to confer accredited degrees to their new graduates, even if these students enrolled and studied while the school was still unaccredited.

But it sounds like WNU won't be getting such "credit". It seems that no one who enrolled or studied at WNU before accreditation will be allowed to receive an accredited degree (unless they are re-admitted and earn a new degree after accreditation). This seems like a vote of no-confidence in WNU's current academic policies.

This may be exactly what WNU is doing. They are now getting rid of all their "old" students: they are giving current students hard deadlines to complete their unaccredited degree programs, and they are refusing to reactivate former students who withdrew from unaccredited degree programs.

So the old students will soon be completely out of the picture. Then WNU will be able to introduce "new and improved" academic standards, and admit a "new and improved" student body. Presumably the new standards and new students will both meet RA requirements.

The FAQs indicate that student from KWU and pre-accreditation WNU will be allowed to reapply to post-accreditation WNU. Students from other unaccredited schools will apparently not be considered.

However, the FAQs also warn that degrees obtained from KWU/WNU before accreditation may not be accepted at face value after accreditation, and that coursework obtained from KWU/WNU before accreditation may not transfer. If WNU does become accredited, then it will be very interesting to see exactly how much value they assign to a KWU degree.

 

Is Warren National that close to being accredited that they need to be concerned about all that right now?

 

Quite possibly. According to
WNU:

Given that WNU expects a "comprehensive evaluation" from a regional accreditation agency in a few weeks, it doesn't seem surprising that they are taking strong measures to clean up their act.

If WNU passes the evaluation, it will likely become an official Candidate for Regional Accreditation next year. As an RA candidate, it will be listed in the CHEA and USDoE databases, and WNU students will become eligible for Federal financial aid.

 

I'd love to see a dirty diaper turn into a real university. But I know (it's a kinda "glass half-empty" thing) that there have been a whole bunch of dirty diaper entities that have claimed all sorts of things about their efforts to achieve accreditation. Aren't they always claiming that they're actively involved in some accreditation process? Why is this any different? When they've actually gotten themselves over the bar then I'll say "Congratulations!" Until then they're just a dirty diaper (with a dirty history).

 

First reason: WNU isn't just talking -- they are actually opening their doors to a "comprehensive evaluation" by a regional accreditation agency next month. WNU has already made it through the first cut of the RA process ("eligibility"), and is now approaching a decision on the second ("candidacy"). Even getting this far must have taken months of planning and significant expense.

Second reason: WNU actually appears to be making major changes. They have already dropped many of their less credible degree programs (e.g. engineering), and now they appear to be dropping their less credible students.

Third reason: Wyoming state law now requires unaccredited schools to get some kind of recognized accreditation. Many unaccredited schools left the state after this law was passed. But WNU decided to stay, so apparently they believe they can comply with the law.

 

That or they've deluded themselves.

This school (or at least, the earlier incarnation of it, K-W) has been one of the biggest unwonderful programs in the US for years. No doubt their growth was fueled by a totally unethical marketing company that proudly advertised K-W alongside credible, legitimate schools, so they bankrolled their attempt at legitimacy off the backs of bazillions of nearly worthless degrees.

If I'm not mistaken, I remember hearing that K-W strongarmed the California licensing authorities into basically ignoring their "unwonderful" status by threatening to sue the individual employees of that part of state government (allowed under California law) into oblivion if they ever attempted to take any action.

We're definitely not talking about a fine institution here, and I simply don't like the idea of rewarding programs that run awful, unwonderful, or fraudulent programs by giving them the opportunity to become legitimate. It's not unlike allowing a drug dealer to sell heroin for 30 years, make a ton of money off of it, and use that money to start a legitimate drugstore. It's wrong, at least in my book.

 

Since the KW to WNU name change, WNU has gotten rid of their most non-wonderful programs. They've published graduation requirements that on the surface look standard. The scuttle-butt though is that they were still using the same business practices and allowing sub-standard graduation requirements. Now they appear to be "flushing the pipeline" of "raw sewage" in progress. October 13-15 is not very far away. There appears to be little time to exhibit standard procedures/practices. What can there be to inspect in the October 13-15 investigation but, sub-standard "raw sewage" in progress? Perhaps the scuttle-butt is wrong? But if the scuttle-butt is wrong then why the need to flush the pipeline? There seems to be two choices, either I'm not understanding something important or WNU is not understanding something important or perhaps both?

 

It's my impression that for a school to receive candidacy, it must first show it can operate at an "accreditable" level. That means students, not no students. "Flushing the pipeline" doesn't resolve it, since those students are being taught at an insufficient level to warrant accreditation (or candidacy).

Even if they teach out these students, they'll need others to teach in order to demonstrate their newly acquired rigor.

I'd rather see them move their current students to the new requirements--if these even exist.

 

It's tough to see what is going on behind the curtain, but the one interesting thing I noticed from their student page (www.wnu.edu - student login), if you don't have a login, it still takes you to a Blackboard site. If you look on the left hand side, there is a general email and phone number for "[email protected]" and "[email protected]", which leads me to believe they are still using some form of mass exams that have no instructor involvement.

This seems consistent with a report from awhile ago on this site where a KWU instructor said that there was no instructor-student contact, unless the student initated a request.