Is American RA really equivalent to international standards?

If Northcentral Univeristy is RA, this obviously raises the question of the legitimacy of RA.

In the United Kingdom, Royal Charter is the standard by which universities are judged. If a university holds Royal Charter, it is accepted as a de-facto legitimate INTERNATIONALLY recognized institution.

In Canada, all universities are accredited by the Province, like the UK, except we don't call it "Royal Charter" anymore (although some of the older universities have Royal Charters).

I guess it wouldn't be so bad if Northcentral offered Associate Degrees only, but it offers everything up to the PhD-level! There are some B&M universities in the US that have been around for 100 years that have not made it to PhD-level offerings.

So, in turn, I do not consider RA to be any type of standard worth quoting for the sake of legitimacy. American universities (unlike British and Canadian) have to be judged individually on the basis of reputation. If Harvard lost RA accreditation tomorrow, it would not matter in the least.

 

I agree that there are RA universities that are utter crap.

But the same is surely true in the U.K. Anglia, Derby, North London: utter crap.

 

Anglia (94/100), Derby (97/100) and London Metropolitan (98/100) might not be top-ranked British schools, BUT they cannot be compared to any American DL institution (Touro, Northcentral, etc.)

The 98/100 London Metropolitan University has....

2 campuses - London City campus and London North campus

13 main sites spread across the 2 campuses

More than 900 full-time academic staff

Over 1,000 part-time academic staff working in 14 academic departments

1,300 non-academic staff working in 25 professional service departments

5 sports facilities

Award winning social facilities

5 libraries plus specialist collections

6 International Offices: (Beijing, New Delhi, Lahore, Dhaka, Shenzhen and Chennai)

4,000 International students from 147 countries, speaking over 40 languages 28,000 students


Even though it is ranked almost at the bottom, it is a real university, offering solid programs. Can you really compare it to Touro or Northcentral?

 

Who has the best sports team?

Are you suggesting that the Londom Metropolitan University can beat Northcentral University's football team?

< scratches head >

 

"Obviously"? Perhaps not. Others might disagree.

Even if one agrees, an exception doesn't prove the rule.

Also, denigrating a DL school because it doesn't look like a campus-based school is illogical. (As if "sports facilities" somehow added to the academic quality of the school.)

Illogical, too, is the statement about accredited schools not yet "making it" to the Ph.D. level, as if they were striving to do so, and time was the primary measure.

Scott has posted his opinion. Fine. But "obviously" there is some disagreement about it.

 

My observation of Susan's recent comments in another thread suggest to me that she is shaking her head in disbelief over this curious absolute, with or without a reference to NCU.

 

Scott Henley wrote:

> In the United Kingdom, Royal Charter is the standard by
> which universities are judged.

I could be wrong, but I have the impression that, until recently, there was no mechanism to revoke a Royal Charter. So theoretically, a university could have received its Royal Charter centuries ago, and deteriorated to any extent since then. This was clearly inferior to the US system, where universities must submit to re-inspection for their accreditation to be renewed.

> If a university holds Royal Charter, it is accepted as a
> de-facto legitimate INTERNATIONALLY recognized institution.

That's true of US Regional Accreditation as well.

> If Northcentral Univeristy is RA, this obviously raises the
> question of the legitimacy of RA. [...]
> American universities (unlike British and Canadian) have to be
> judged individually on the basis of reputation.

The Regional Accreditors are, of course, staffed by fallible human beings; so it's conceivable that they made a mistake about Northcentral University. But do keep in mind that, to make their decision, they gathered a lot more data about NCU than you and I have. When you suggest that universities "be judged individually", you are suggesting that you, with a lot fewer data, can make a better judgment than a Regional Accreditor with a lot more data. I'm afraid I find that arrogant.

"On the basis of reputation"? Even worse. What is "reputation" but the sum total of rumours and vague impressions?

> If Harvard lost RA accreditation tomorrow, it would not
> matter in the least.

I grant that if Harvard withdrew from the accreditation process, the value of its degrees would scarcely be diminished. I grant that Harvard could not have the reputation it has if its researchers had never done solid work.

But if Harvard stopped doing solid work tomorrow, how long would it be before its reputation was affected? I think a while. Note that Harvard has been doing grade inflation for decades now, with hardly any effect on its reputation. Harvard's centuries-old "name brand recognition" has a larger impact on the public consciousness than any facts about what it may be doing now.

 

There has been talk about grade inflation at Harvard on this forum and other places as well. I've posted on this topic myself. But you're saying this has been going on for "decades?" Let's see some evidence for this statement Mark.
Jack

 

Hi, Jack. Readers of this forum are better informed than your average bear.

But we might still benefit from a quick Google search, with which I found that former Harvard President Neil L. Rudenstine "noted that the first observable grade inflation occurred from 1947 to 1949", and that there was quite a bit more in the 1960s.
http://www.harvard-magazine.com/archive/01mj/mj01_jhj_15.html

 

We have to remember that accreditation, and I would assume a government charter where that is the measure, are designed to assure a MINIMUM standard--to say that in the case of most students, for most degrees issued, in most instances, minimum standards agreeed upon by the association and its applicants have been or are being met. The problem with an unaccredited school--as Rich Douglas is wont to point out--is NOT that it may not actually meet these standards but that it has not demonstrated to an outside authority that it has met such standards; in other words, we have to take the school and its graduate's word for it. I think that there are in fact problems with accreditation, both in philosophical and practical terms, but that some accredited schools are worse--even substantially worse--than others is not one of them. To my way of thinking, an accredited 300 year old private institution that costs 26 thousand dollars a year had better be of substantially higher quality than a newly accredited distance education JC that costs $102 a unit. If not, something is really wrong. ( A teacher at a JC I teach at once told his students that for all intents and purposes the JC was the "same" as Harvard! The students never stopped laughing!) The question raised far transcends accreditation or non-accreditation, and is profoundly philosophical, ideological, personal and situational--what is a good school and what constitutes "higher" education?

Blessings

 

I may be mistaken but isn't Oxford and Cambridge "unaccredited" or unchartered under the UK system?

 

Scott,

I’m not certain how or why you group Touro with Northcentral, or use Touro as an institution from which to contrast the stature and substance of Derby and London Metropolitan.

For clarification, I have very little knowledge of either UK school that you have referenced, but from what you present as a profile for London Metropolitan, I do not see how they would be any less credible than many of the mainstream US institutions.

However, considering that you group Touro with Northcentral and suggest that it is largely inferior to London Metropolitan makes me wonder if you are fully informed surrounding Touro and its substance.

Here is what can be determined from Touro’s various websites and related information:

• Established in 1970 as non-profit private institution
• 4 main campuses (3 in the US and 1 in Israel)
  - New York City (Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island)
  - Mares Island, California
  - Cypress, California
  - Jerusalem, Israel
• 26 main sites across the campuses
• 15 libraries
• International offices in Israel and Moscow
• ABA accredited law school
• Medical School (one of 19 US post doctoral medical schools approved by the American Osteopathic Association)
• All Colleges: The Lander College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (Men's and Women's Divisions); The Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center; The Graduate School of Jewish Studies; The School of Health Sciences; The School of General Studies; The School of Lifelong Education; The International School of Business and Management; The Graduate School of Education and Psychology; The School of Career and Applied Studies; and Touro University (California). Touro University includes Touro University International, Touro University - California, home of the Touro University College of Osteopathic Medicine and College of Health Sciences.
• Approximately 12,000+ students (no data found on websites regarding number of international students)
• Approximately 900-1,000 faculty (most appear to be full time). No indication of total staff or administration personnel found.
• No listed university owned sports facilities; however, they have Yankee Stadium, Shea Stadium, and Madison Square Gardens just a stone’s throw away. From what I understand, the Yankees are the (unofficial) Touro athletic "proxy" team, so they can kick most any other team’s butt—except for the Marlins, of course <smile>.

Indeed, Touro is not a Columbia, Cornell, or Harvard, it is clearly something quite different than Northcentral too. Moreover, based on the criteria that you present, one can see the stature or substance of Touro is not appear that far apart from what you show for London Metropolitan.

Therefore, to answer your question "Can you really compare London Metropolitan to Touro or Northcentral?" My answer is Touro, yes; Northcentral, probably not.

Regarding your statement, "Anglia (94/100), Derby (97/100) and London Metropolitan (98/100) might not be top-ranked British schools, BUT they cannot be compared to ANY American DL institution...." You may be hard pressed to compare these schools to a cross section of American institutions like Stanford University, Penn State, University of Michigan, University, University of Florida and the like, that offer comprehensive DL degree programs. However, I'm sure that you can muster up equally wonderful if not superior schools in the UK, so things overall might be tit for tat. However, we should be careful to fully understand the schools we are comparing.

Tom

 

Touro has:

Touro University California, the new name for Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine (TUCOM). TUCOM occupies a historic set of buildings at the former Mare Island Naval Shipyard, some of them dating to the Civil War. The campus extends over 123 acres and includes research laboratories and an animal facility. Apparently there are plans to open a second TUCOM campus in Las Vegas. TUCOM is regionally accredited by Middle States and has specialized accreditation from the American Osteopathic Association.

http://tucom.edu/

Touro California apparently is putting in education programs as well, and is in talks with the California teacher credentialling people to get them recognized.

A TUCOM biochemistry professor's webpage discussing the activities of his research group:

http://209.209.34.25/webdocs/biochemistry/alejandro/laboratory.htm

Touro Law Center. Ths one is located in Huntington NY and is accredited by Middle States and by the American Bar Association.

http://www.tourolaw.edu/AboutTLC/

Touro's NYC campus includes the Graduate School of Jewish Studies, which includes the opportunity to study at Touro's remote site in Jerusalem.

http://www.touro.edu/judagrad/

Few ivy league universities offer as complete a lineup of courses in the history of Jewish thought:

http://www.touro.edu/judagrad/course.asp

Touro's Judaica library receives recognition by Princeton:

http://www.princeton.edu/~pressman/libjew.htm

Touro's DL operation is Touro University International in LA:

http://www.tourou.edu/

With a couple of exceptions (including our old friend from Berne) TUI's faculty listing isn't too terrible (There are even a couple of graduates of a British degree-mill called "Cambridge"):

http://www.tourou.edu/catalog/faculty.htm

Operating in LA makes a lot of people from industry and from other local universities available as adjuncts to advise doctoral students in their specialties.

Touro's School of Health Sciences' program in physical therapy is apparently putting in a new doctoral program, accredited by Commission on Accreditation of Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE):

http://www.touro.edu/shs/pt/pt.asp

An articulation arrangement between Touro and the Technion in Israel:

http://212.68.158.15/technion/american_overview.html

A masters program offered jointly by Touro's school of education and the New York state teacher's union:

http://www.nysut.org/etp/touro.html

Articulation agreements between Touro and Marymount College in Tarrytown NY:

http://www.marymt.edu/academics/accelerated_degree.html

 

Craig Hargis wrote:

> A teacher at a JC I teach at once told his students that for
> all intents and purposes the JC was the "same" as Harvard!
> The students never stopped laughing!

Ignorant laughter. Had any of them actually attended Harvard?

I did first year at an Ivy League university (Cornell). I learned calculus by doing excercices out of the Swokowski textbook. I then transferred to a public university (University of Alberta). I learned calculus by doing excercices out of the Swokowski textbook. No difference.

If you're an undergrad, no matter where you go, you'll learn by doing the same exercises out of the same textbooks. If you're a grad student, what matters is not the quality of the school, but the quality of one professor there, your supervisor.

Is there any advantage to going to an Ivy League university? Well, yes, you may make some friends from rich families. But in terms of formal education, not necessarily.

> To my way of thinking, an accredited 300 year old private
> institution that costs 26 thousand dollars a year had better be
> of substantially higher quality than a newly accredited distance
> education JC that costs $102 a unit. If not, something is really
> wrong.

Wrong? Not necessarily. It's just that (as Menaechmus observed in the 4th century BC) there's no royal road to learning.

> The question raised far transcends accreditation or
> non-accreditation, and is profoundly philosophical, ideological,
> personal and situational--what is a good school and what
> constitutes "higher" education?

Indeed.

 

Snore ...

Oh look Scott's back ... and look, he is
trolling again with the very same topic
as before ... what 1 - 2 years ago?

This time NCU is his trigger-point to wake
up and whine about his dislike of RA ...

He failed to prove his case before, and
so far seems to have failed again.

Zzzzzzzz ... nothing new here to discuss.

Billy

 

Re: Re: Is American RA really equivalent to international standards?

Oh, but they do, Rich.

My own CSUDH has been building hundreds of millions of dollars of (privately funded) sports facilities, hosting the finals of this year's Women's World Cup as well as the recent championship game of Major League Soccer. (Won by the San Jose Earthquakes, I might add.)

http://www.sportsvenue-technology.com/projects/home_depot/

Compare that to the hopeless University of Chicago which doesn't even have a football team. The only use they could ever find for their derelict football stadium was building the world's first nuclear reactor under the stands during the second world war.

(They were apparently trying to test a prototype seat warmer for Soldier Field, but they couldn't make frozen Bears fans glow brightly enough in the dark to make night games possible, so the idea was abandoned.)

 

Hi Mark (and all) I agree with you to a point. I think a good education can be had at a wide range of schools. But I don't know if the student's laughter was "ignorant." Just because a school uses the same textbook and requires the same exercises does not make the educational experience the same. Harvard and the JC in question both have teachers, buildings, parking lots, and yes, even athletic facilities as well as standard textbooks. But saying they are essentially the same seems to me like saying that because two football teams have coaches, players, and a stadium that they are the same--despite records that say something very different. Or like saying that all restaurants are the same because they employ the same basic ingredients.

 

But what do the records in fact say here?

That Harvard grads are "more likely to succeed"? True, but that may be due more to Harvard's highly competitive admissions (or to personal connections the students may make) than to "the educational experience" when the students are there.

That Harvard profs do better research? True, but it doesn't really affect undergrads that much.

That Harvard profs are better at teaching? I would need to see the evidence.

 

Mark - obviously this is a neat citation but I'm not certain it entirely illustrates your original point. The article states that the underlying reasons behind the grade inflation were large-scale sociological phenomena. These phenomena may well have effected grading at Harvard but it would also follow that they effected grading at all other schools at the same time. Therefore the relative effect (Harvard v. any other given school) would have been approximately zero. Your original statement singled out Harvard when there's clearly reason to believe that grade inflation was a widespread phenomenon in US higher education.
Jack

 

It's true but mostly irrelevant. These schools were started up before current UK educational system came into effect. The UK government even includes them in the list of accredited schools within the UK.