Many people are aware of the accreditation monopolies in the United States education system. Some of these monopolies are hurting creativity in alternative programs that have legitimate contributions for our society. The United Kingdom has many avenues of study including a national work-based degree structure that identifies experienced base learning through Guilds and is internationally respected. The example of the United Kingdom system is evidence to support that education does not take one form. The House of Representatives is considering a Bill that will allow greater flexibility in education. I encourage each of you to contact your Congressmen and express your support for Bill H.R. 838. 108th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 838 A BILL To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide greater academic freedom for institutions of higher education, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES. (a) SHORT TITLE- This Act may be cited as the `Higher Education Accrediting Agency Responsibility Act of 2003'. (b) PURPOSES- The purposes of this Act are as follows: (1) To refocus the purpose of accreditation on providing comparative information about the quality of institutions of higher education, rather than determining student aid eligibility, which should properly be the responsibility of the Department of Education. (2) To end the virtual monopoly that today's accrediting agencies enjoy, and require them to operate in a competitive environment like any other industry. Full Document Website: http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr838.html
The Need If it is going no where, it still doesn't negate the need. Distance Education is legitimate education.
There are several thousand degree-granting institutions in the U.S. Accreditation is a form of quality control, but it also provides the standards that must be met in order to operate legitimately in the field. That accreditation is offered by the member schools themselves. "Monopoly" is an inaccurate term. "Oligopoly" would be more accurate. Is the environment competitive? Not as much as a completely free market, but we've seen what a lack of regulation can lead to under those circumstances. Educational quality is a difficult thing for consumers to assess prior to committing their funds towards it. As such, they need assurances that they're spending their dollars wisely. The higher eduction industry self-regulates using the accreditation process. The federal government uses accreditation as an assurance that its financial aid dollars are spent legitimately. This resembles a regulated oligopoly rather than a natural monopoly. But new entries are permitted, competition reigns, etc. Look no further than the rise of for-profit universities for relevant examples. If you want monopolies, look at other countries, like the U.K., where only the government determines what is and is not a university. There is far less competition--and innovation--in those environments. You can look it up.
Respectfully Disagree I believe the United Kingdom has a better system because it acknowledges learning from more than just universities and colleges. This is an international trend not just a UK trend.
Re: Respectfully Disagree I'm not sure what that means. I would point you to the tens of thousands of tertiary institutions in the U.S. that are not degree-granting. I would also point you to the many, many colleges and universities that recognize and give credit for non-collegiate learning. Then there are the many, many colleges and universities that give credit for prior learning and experience. You're certainly not suggesting that there is more flexibility and variety in the U.K. as compared to the U.S.?
British Engineering Council Let me point you to the finest example of open learning ever created. http://www.engc.org.uk/ The American system gives educational credit on a very limited scope, one class at a time. This is not the same as the full Bachelors level acknowledgement achieved through the "Mature Canadiate" route established by the British Engineering Council. The council has literally as many guilds, and professional bodies, as universities and colleges who can address learning however you achieve it.
Re: British Engineering Council Yes, that's right the Engineering Council (UK) awards Professional Designation via the "Mature Entry Route". The Council also offers 3 examinations: 1. EC UK Certificate 2. EC UK Graduate Diploma 3. EC UK Post Graduate Diploma All of which are qualifications that may be the basis for the professional engineer titles - Chartered Engineer, Incorporated Engineer, or Engineering Technician, which ever is appropriate. A degree is no longer required to achieve the title. I have no question regarding educational policies and regulations of any country, but if learning outcome and currency of that knowledge is the issue, the UK system (such as the Engineering Council UK) has it. Regardless of the route to registration one may go through (via normal route - with degree, via examination, or via mature entry), a rigorous assessment of one's currency of the "Body of Knowledge" expected from an engineer has to be undertaken through a series of interviews (the Professional Review Interview). As long as a candidate can demonstrate that knowledge at professional level regardless of how and where that learning was earned, the EC UK may grant due recognition through its licensed Professional Institutions. There are, of course, other requirements to registration with EC UK. I just emphasized here the "knowledge" level of a candidate, if quality of education by any system (US, UK, and etc.) is the issue. Well, please note that I don't intend to write here in behalf of the EC UK. Rather, this is how I perceived their standards to registration (SARTOR). And if anyone in this forum is well versed of the EC UK procedures, please do correct this perception should it be misleading.
Re: Re: British Engineering Council Philip, I noticed that you are CISP from Canada. I am also interested in getting that title. Can you provide me more info on their reqirements, how difficult it is to do that, and how many exams are required etc.. my email [email protected] or you can send me a PM. Thanks.
Re: Re: Re: British Engineering Council Hi, I gained the Information Systems Professional - I.S.P. designation via examination by the ICCP. If one doesn't have the CIPS accredited degree, the ICCP's CCP is one of the alternatives. The British Computer Society's (BCS) examinations may also be used instead. Here is the link to CIPS for more details of the requirements: http://www.cips.ca/standards/ispcert/ Thanks for asking.
Re: Re: Re: British Engineering Council Sorry I forgot to include the ICCP and the BCS links. The ICCP can be found at: http://www.iccp.org The BCS site is at: http://www.bcs.org.uk
This proposed bill is simply foolishness. As just one example of that, here's how Rep. Petri proposes to modify the provisions for eligibility for federal funding: (e) TITLE III ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS- Section 312(b)(1) (20 U.S.C. 1058(b)(1)) is amended-- (1) by striking subparagraph (D); and (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively. And here's subparagraph (D) that he intends to delete: (D) which is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary to be reliable authority as to the quality of training offered or which is, according to such an agency or association, making reasonable progress toward accreditation; The degree mills must be salivating at this bill. How a Congressman can pretend to be an opponent of government waste and then sponsor a bill that proposes to extend government education funding to degree mills is totally beyond me.
