State Approved Utility?

I understand that State Approved Universities, while legal, will have less utility than Regional/National schools; that said, it is interesting that the following professionals seem to have succeeded despite the lack of full usage that a purely accredited option holds. It is interesting that one is a government official, and the other has obtained a Regionally Accredited Masters, while holding a state approved Bachelors. Certainly, one can assume success based on effort and solid work experience, but....


www.defenselink.mil/ra/bios/walker.html


www.fema.com/regions/x/2002/r10_08.shtm

 

But did these people need a degree to attain these positions? There are many similar positions filed by persons with no degrees at all.

 

Who needs a degree!

You know you don't need a degree at all to become a billionare!

Why even bother see this bio: http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/default.asp

 

As has been pointed out, having a degree and having it be responsible, in part or in whole, to one's success are two different things. Such listings are not cause-and-effect proofs.

Of course, this has been pointed out--without being refuted--about 10,000 times on this board. Duh.

 

But a large body of anecdotal evidence shows that state approved degrees work for many people, probably tens of thousands..

The problem is when people do not understand the limitation of state approved degrees as for licensing or as a qualification.

When (if) I finish my MBA, my next desire would be to get a DBA from California Coast University.

Why, you ask? Because it can be done by coursework only. In business, I couldn't possibly produce a dissertation consisting of original research that expands the body of knowledge in the field and CCU is there for people like me.

I have taught in community colleges enough to know that I should not be allowed in a classroom and have no plans to ever work for anyone other than myself.

To the .001 % of the population who would note that CCU is not accredited - bite me.

Now in the field of history where my first degree and my major academic interest lies, I would want only an accredited degree because there are endless possibilities for original research.

 

What's the difference between earning a degree and earning a qualification? Degrees seem to communicate something about academic qualifications to somebody, even if it's just to yourself.

I'd certainly ask "why", but my question concerns something more fundamental than coursework requirements.

Why do you want a DBA in the first place? What role would such a degree play in your life? What use would you have for it?

If I did, you would be lacking a strategic part of your anatomy.

Perhaps I'm being too hard here. I like a number of state-approved programs myself. Since they aren't formally accredited, I judge them by my own peculiar and idiosyncratic criteria. Certainly other people might have their own opinions, which might vary widely from mine.

I'll also admit that on occassion I lust after a doctorate. I want other people to call me "doctor", or at least to know that I have a doctorate and they don't. I want them to defer to me intellectually and socially, to bend a knee to me, to humbly take instruction from a superior. I want to walk into a room and immediately be recognized as an authority.

But I also recognize that kind of degree-lust isn't healthy.

What has original research got to do with accreditation?

What bothers me is the idea of knowingly earning a degree that one believes to be substandard, declining to use it in situations where professional colleagues might recognize that fact, but trying to pass the degree among laymen who wouldn't know the difference.

As I said above, there are state approved programs that I like. But I usually like them precisely because I think that I can defend them to anyone on earth.

The National Test Pilot School is CA-approved, but it offers a program that's virtually unique, well known in its industry (and it actually trains some of your own Canadian Forces pilots). Expression Center for New Media puts out a unique cutting-edge digital arts program. Hsi Lai University has one of the more impressive Buddhist studies curricula in the United States. San Francisco Law School maintains a respectable ~70% pass-rate on the tough CA bar exam.

The point being that these are all degrees that one could present to professionals in the fields concerned without shame or embarrasment.

Frankly, I don't know what to make of Cal Coast. I'm not prepared to write it off, but I don't think that I could defend it either.

The bottom line for me is whether or not a state-approved degree is credible (first) to me personally, and (second) to professionals in the field and specialty of the degree. Satisfying the first criterion would justify me taking individual classes for self-improvement and personal edification. The second criterion would have to be met for me to consider actually earning (and certainly using) a degree.

 

Living in Canada has one benefit. The normal assumption is that a university no-one has ever heard of, in the United States, is a soft touch anyway. Why else would a Canadian want to attend?

California Coast - the Union Institute - you say tomato - I say tomawto.

I don't exactly cruise in academic circles so I doubt that anyone could care less. Just hang it on the wall and let it speak for itself.

The only reason to acquire the DBA would pure personal satisfaction. Not every mountain climber has to climb Mt. Everest to be satisfied. The degree has coursework and isn't a gimme.

A real doctorate doesn't need a thesis. Talk to an doctor, dentist, veterinarian, chiropractor, pharmacist, lawyer and probably others. What's the deal? I would consider it a professional degree, a DBA, not a PhD.

 

Just a couple of generic points about a CCU degree:

1) It has utiliity in some places. Regardless of perception, there are companies who award promotion and benefit for having the degree. Additionally, if you can pass the exam, you can get licenesed to practice psychology in California. However, not many CCU graduates have passed the exam (based on info in earlier threads).

2) CCU degrees, although not of the same quality of RA degrees, are certainly better than fake degrees and degree mill operations because there is aleast some standard to get the degree (yes I understand it is an easier standard).

3) There are circumstances where the remoteness of location or other cricumstances may make sense for someone to pursue the CCU degree. Even finance may be an issue.

Having said the above, a CCU degree does not have the same utility that an RA degree has.

I also appreciate the points brought up by Mr. Douglas about the differencees between academic practitioner doctorates (Ed.D., DBA, Psy.D., etc.) and first professional doctorates (M.D., J.D. , D.O. ,etc.) . there are very real distinctions. However, the academic doctorates do not "always" require a dissertation or thesis. In RA environments they always require original research, but sometimes it can be a specialized project rather than a dissertation.

A final point, I think if someone wants a CCU degree, it is just fine. I find it interesting that members of this forum often attack the individual making a choice for the CCU degree. If it meets their needs, values, interests, etc.; it is nobody elses business!

 

Say anything dismissive that you want to about American universities, but even the haughtiest of Canadians has to admit that the stupid muck-grubbing Americans have somehow managed to produce the best educated smart bombs on the whole freakin' planet.

 

Using a degree kind of forces one to attend to the matter of how the degree is received by other people. That's the whole point in earning a degree isn't it? The idea is to get others to repond to your degree (and to you) in the way that you desire.

Again, I like some non-accredited progams. I certainly wouldn't want to dismiss all of them a-priori.

But my point is that if a program is going to be credible, it needs to be defensible. You need to be able to sell it to skeptics.

I could defend the CA-approved NTPS because it offers a program like no other in the United States and because it's recognized by organizations like NASA and the FAA. I could defend CA-approved Expression Center's digital arts programs based on their unique "total immersion" model, their facilities, industry contacts and excellent student work. I could defend CA-approved Hsi Lai because of the extensive hard-to-duplicate coursework it offers on many specialized Buddhist texts and topics. I could defend CA-approved San Francisco Law School based on its demonstrated success preparing graduates for the CA bar exam.

Frankly, I don't know where Cal Coast falls in that regard. I'm certainly not dismissing it. I'm just suggesting that if this thing needs to be addressed head on.

 

Interestingly all colleges and universities are seen on a continuum of perception:

degree mills are less than state approved(with real coursework);
state approved are less than RA distance (Touro, Walden, NCU, etc.);
RA distance are less than RA tradtional;
RA state universities are less than IVY league;
and I am sure Cambridge and Oxford would make some claim to being superior to Ivy league.

However, perception is not what ultimately matters, personal utility is.

 

A great point, however personal utility is almost entirely determined BY perception.

 

A continuum that distinguishes between accredited schools? Certainly. But all of the points on the above continuum are not equidistant. There is a huge gulf between accredited and unaccredited schools, and it is much larger than the difference between unaccredited schools and degree mills. And the difference between regionally accredited schools offering their degrees by DL and the ones who are classroom-based is very small, at least according to Bear's survey of admissions officials.

 

Ahhh, we now know the driving force behind DegreeInfo senior members.

 

WOW

The sharks are feeding.

Indicate an interest in a California Approved school and the surface is cut by multiple dorsal fins.

The degreeinfo argument that it is better to have no education than a tainted? education comes out. Why would one want a doctorate if it was to be unaccredited?

I simply would not want to spend $30-50,000 to obtain a piece of paper that I could obtain for < $5,000, considering it would purely be for personal satisfaction.

It constantly amazes me how when a school that is considered pure crap because of lack of accreditation is suddenly accredited, it is a viable option as in Northcentral University. Apparently there is no middle ground, just degreeinfo miracles.

I think CCU would be an excellent option for people at a mature point in their careers to acquire more education and it escapes me why anyone would ever be embarrassed about more education, regardless of the source.

Why would anyone care about someone talking behind their back? Don't they do it anyway.

I have recently heard someone's masters degree as "just" being from Gonzaga. I have heard of someone's doctorate not politely being described as from "some college in the states". I looked it up and it was the University of Utah. CCU wouldn't fare any worse.

 

You've left out GAAP foreign research doctorates. Where would you fit these into your schematic?
Jack

 

...or nationally accredited schools...or schools with special RA, who are not able to grant degrees.

Tony