ACCIS?

Thoughts or opinions on ACCIS. I am seeking an additional B.S. degree to broaden my horizons. Given their past history (WACS) accreditation, what are the current opinions now? I have read the previous thread, however, many questions remain as to acceptance. I do not plan to teach at the college level, just seeking additional viable skills. Please input as necessary.

 

Given ACCIS checkered history and second-rate DETC accreditation, there are MUCH MUCH better options.

Tom Head or Larry McQueary (both authors of books on IT degrees, one from McGraw Hill and one from Ten Speed) could better comment on this, but two that are often spoken of with positive words are City University in Washington state, and University of MD - University College.

 

Thanks, Chip. Both City and UMUC are great options; Capitol College (http://www.capitol-college.edu) and Bellevue University (http://www.bellevue.edu) might also be good bets at the bachelor's level, and National Technological University (http://www.ntu.edu), Rensselaer (http://www.rpi.edu), and RIT (http://www.rit.edu) pretty good bets at the master's level.

My position on the DETC: getting a first bachelor's through a DETC-accredited school is like wearing a pair of high heels to a marathon. It doesn't help, and you'll probably have to start over barefoot before you can progress. Getting a DETC-accredited master's or second bachelor's is an altogether different story, but ACCIS is probably my least favorite DETC-accredited school; if I were to do a DETC-accredited master's in an IT field, it would be through ISIM University (http://www.isim.edu).

If cost is a major consideration, you might consider the University of South Africa (http://www.unisa.ac.za), or the University of London (http://www.lon.ac.uk/external), or an Australian school like Charles Sturt (http://www.csu.edu.au) or the University of Southern Queensland (http://www.usq.edu.au).

The new "Bears' Guide to the Best Computer Degrees by Distance Learning," by Bear/Bear/McQueary with a little help from Head, does profile 100 schools offering distance learning programs in various IT-related fields. And it does it without touching ACCIS with a ten-foot pole.

If you're looking for semi-traditional regionally accredited programs, you might try "Get Your IT Degree and Get Ahead" (Bear/Bear/Head), which profiles 199 U.S. regionally accredited schools offering programs in IT-related fields. Only 114 distance learning programs are covered here, as opposed to the 250+ covered in the Best Computer Degrees book, but it still covers the U.S. regionally accredited options pretty comprehensively.

Good luck!


Peace,

Tom

 

All of the criticism of ACCIS here related to the way the advertised and marketed themselves -- the highly misleading way they reported their useless WAUC accreditation, and so on. But none of the critics, self included, actually reviwed the course materials. And that is all DETC did (plus checking on student satisfaction); DETC did not seem to take past history into account.

So if gaining knowledge is the only goal, it might well be appropriate to inspect the actual course materials of ACCIS and several other schools, and to talk to other students and alumni. (Any school should be willing to put you in touch with them.)

DETC schools do not have nearly as high an acceptance rate in academia as regionally accredited ones, but they are well ahead of whatever is in 3rd place.

 

Well worth mentioning; I notice now that the first post asked for information on a second bachelor's, and for this purpose the ACCIS might well work.


Peace,

Tom

 

I've followed the negative opinions on ACCIS here and on the education newsgroup. Why is it that there is only a handfull of people that 'put down' ACCIS? If ACCIS was so bad, wouldn't ex students post to say how much trouble they have had getting a good job?

I'm looking for a Bachelors of Computer Science online and the ACCIS' site is so far, the clearest and most informative site that I have seen. Other schools have intro courses in pascal while ACCIS uses C++. Who is more modern then?

Perhaps RA accredited schools want to preserve thier status *and* high tuition. Perhaps the low cost of ACCIS is a competative threat to them.

It just seems that the only negatives that a *few* people have is thier perspective on the merits of AICS' past use of another accredation agency. Separate the apples from the oranges. Does a marketing decision mean the program is no good? Did ACCIS *deserve* a better accredation which it eventualy received?

Saying that you would not touch ACCIS with a ten foot pole doesn't cut mustard. Be specific. Why not? Give an example of recent students that are not satisfied with ACCIS.

I have tried to find negative info on ACCIS but the same critical names crop up all the time. Why only a handlefull of negative views if the school is not good?

 

Academically, by all accounts, the school seems to be quite sound; ethically, the operators conduct has been reprehensible, outragous, and disgraceful. Knowing *full well* that the World Association is a complete and total fraud, the individuals who operate the school (NOT Clayton, mind you... I am speaking of the current operators) chose to defraud potential students by representing that AICS was accredited by this worthless agency... conveniently failing to mention that WAUC is a bogus accreditor and that the value of World Association accreditation is meaningless. This conscious decision was made, apparently, for "marketing" reasons.

Further, for many, many years they could not enroll students in their own state... hardly an endorsement for a quality program.

Basically, if *all* you care about is the teaching, it's probably OK. If you care about having the degree you earn respected, there are *much, much* better options at a similar or lower rate, as Tom has pointed out above. So much for the "high priced RA" argument.

If you want to earn a degree by supporting a school run by a bunch of people that have a demonstrable history of consciously choosing to defraud unsuspecting students in the name of "marketing", by all means, ACCIS will probably be fine. It *may* even eventually (because of the name change) be successful in running from its sleazy past. But why give any support to an organization that institutionally *chose* to defraud its students? Why run the risk that, since the same disgraceful, unethical, and deceptively-minded folks still run the operation, they may be doing other equally disgraceful things that will eventually cast the school in a bad light?

*That* is why I won't touch the school with a ten foot pole.



[Note: This message has been edited by Chip]

 

I've just commenced my BComp(Computer Science and Software Development) through Deakin University, www.deakin.edu.au and am very happy with the course delivery so far. You may wish to explore Deakin as an option as well.

And here come the pearls of wisdom: don't close your options too early. Just because you think at this moment that there is no chance of you ever wanting to do a Master's or go into academia, this can change. So, choose your future alma mater carefully. Go for the best and most prestigious you can afford. This way all avenues remain open and you are not stumbling along with a millstone around your neck.

Unless you are exceptionally gifted you will have to work hard for your degree,irrespective of educational establishment. So you might as well make it worth your time and dollars.
Make sure the degree will be a stepping stone and not a stumbling stone.

If you'd like to know more about the course I'm doing at Deakin, feel free to contact me at [email protected]

 

Tom, Rich Douglas, under the mentorship of John Bear, has posted preliminary research figures that suggest 47% acceptance of DETC degrees/credits by regionally accredited institutions. To say one would need to start over implies little or no acceptance. Just wondering how your position fits with Rich's preliminary findings.

 

Just to clarify: I didn't do the research, John did. I just added some statistical tests beyond the descriptive stats John had already computed (like the 47% figure quoted above).

Rich Douglas

 

I thank you for your replies Chip. I'm trying to piece together the best solution for myself.

Your above statement is confusing.We're not talking about a corner store here.How can ACCIS be academically OK and be run by what you call "sleazebags"? I mean, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree?

You do put ACCIS down with a passion. Have you heard *any* ACCIS student say that they were not prepared for the modern computer workplace? Is there anyone that has been "ripped off"? Is a past lower level accredation no more than a marketing debut of a new school?

Have you seen ACCIS' site? It is very clear and they seem to be using the latest high tech software for an online education medium.From visiting the site, it seems that ACCIS is -up-to-date-. There's no adobe pages to load with print that is hard to read. The Computer program is easy to locate. It is well explained. Thier training is in C++ where other programs use older languages. This appears as a motivated staff. The school appears to have initiative to adopt the latest technologies.

I live in Montreal Canada. Mcgill University here is a VERY good university. However, they //Do Not\\ have any online computer bachelors.Now how intelligent is that?A respected University that is operating as if it were 1984. Thank you very much Mcgill -not.

Referring to a past accredation in respect to ACCIS in vague terms, ie "sleazy" is like blowing smoke over the question.I need facts.

Thanks again for your help and time.

 

John, it happened that's the way it is. ACCIS used borderline fraudulent tactics to lure in customers. They were flat out unethical tactics. In my mind this indicates a lack of honesty in an administration that would allow this. Who knows what else the dishonesty could mean? This is just what was visible. For example, perhaps they were loose with academic policies in order to keep students enrolled? These kind of things could mean that there are unprepared ACCIS graduates in the work place giving hard working graduates a bad name.

 

Ex-pres Clinton clearly demonstrated fraudulent and sleazy tactics, a lack of honesty, and exhibited profound unethical behavior. So, would you propose the condemnation of the entire democratic party and ignore what they want to accomplish because of the "sleazy" Bill Clinton?

I'm amazed at the level of attacks on the quality of ACCIS's programs when no one here has yet to demonstrate ANY knowledge of their academic programs. They are DETC accredited - right? The DETC says that ACCIS meets the DETC standards. What more do want?

 

This "halo effect" is not really effective in discerning the truth. In fact, the available evidence points the other way. It appears that ACCIS did engage in a highly questionable practice (listing accreditation with the WAUC). They're also owned by the same person(s) owning Chadwick University and two nutritional schools. This outfit had for quite awhile been prohibited from taking on students from its home state (Alabama), and was less-than-open about the reasons. (It had to do with the fact they were not properly licensed in Alabama, but the school wouldn't come out and say this.)

On the plus side, the school is properly accredited with DETC. You can argue the value of that all day long, but it is still true. Also, they seem to offer a rigorous academic program. Finally, they've been established for more than a decade.

To assume the school cannot deliver a quality education and a usable credential because it engaged in a horrible business practice at one time is lazy thinking and goes against the observable facts. I wouldn't recommend this school to everyone (anyone?), but nor would I assume that because they claimed WAUC accreditation everything else about them is bad, too. Especially when other indications point elsewhere.

Rich Douglas

 

Let me add some examples of good schools that did bad things:

Union Institute: Sued into bankruptcy by faculty and students. Serious financial and academic inconsistencies. Lost their Candidacy for Accreditation status.

National University: Placed on probation by its regional accreditor. Reorganized under bankruptcy. Started, then dropped, 700-level courses that were to eventually lead to a doctorate, stranding dozens of post-MBA students.

University of Phoenix: Called a diploma mill in the press by others in Arizona higher education.

California Coast University: Highly inconsistent academic standards. Forced to abandon their first name, California Western U., which they took after the orignial California Western changed its name to U.S. International University.

Andrew Jackson University: Criticized for poor academics and--I believe--WAUC accreditation.

Touro University International: Advertised their accredited degrees before they were included in the home campus's accreditation.

Harvard College (now University): Thank you, Dr. Mather. (If you make me a doctor, I'll make you one.)

Yale University: Multum donavit. ("He gave a lot.")

Not to mention the Fieldings, Waldens, Sarasotas, and Novas who've been called diploma mills by many people, despite going on to prove the critics wrong.

Rich Douglas, who encourages people to look at everything carefully and assume little.

 

This may be a bit too much to ask.

 

I'm still not clear about what ACCIS stands for right *now*. Has anyone holding an ACCIS degree been turned down for a job? Who, when, where? I looked at Thomas Edison college's website and their degree is significantly more expensive than ACCIS. More over, you can start at any time at ACCIS.

A modern attitude speaks volumes. Starting a program when I want, use of a high level language like C++. Use of high tech mediums to communicate with the student.ex "Interactive multimedia computer based training (CBT) developed by Smartforce — the world's leading producer of CBT ").

Why are magor universities lagging behind the distance learning field? Aren't the ivory tower professors against this new arena of learning? Are they afraid that their control of education will slip away from their grasp? You can state that there are cheaper schools out there but how many RA accredited colleges are just out of reach of an ordinary worker? New Jersy instute of technology sounds impressive, must be eh?, for the 70 000$ U.S. that you will have to pay for it. Maybe that is why most RA schools will not say, "ya, your degree is equal to mine". How can they when they are asking 7 times as much for theirs? They would be discrediting their values if they were to accept parity. So some schools(47% ?) accept DETC, perhaps those are the schools with resonable tuitions.

 

To clarify, what John and I are saying is that degrees from schools accredited by a recognized national agency like DETC are, according to the survey results, 47% as acceptable as degrees from RA schools having some residency component. About 20% of respondents rejected such degrees completely. The others indicated varying levels of acceptability. (Respondents were asked to rate each form of accreditation/recognition on a 6 to 0 (zero) scale.

Rich Douglas, who is glad he missed the whole "slide rule" era.

 

How can anyone possibly expect a RA school that charges 30/40/50/60/70000$ to accept a degree that cost 7000$? This would discredit their pricing policy. Therefore the only arguements that I hear against ACCIS seemed geared to who accredited them in their past. No arguement is given based on the courses offered. I can not evaluate a school based on rumor.

 

Moreover, I'm inclined to believe that ivory schools fear an infusion of education opportunities. Law of supply and demand then will force them to lower their tuitions due to competition. Competition that now can be offered at low prices due to lowered overhead costs. Will the ivory schools encourage the emergence of lower tuition degrees? I doubt it. This would only hasten the lowering of tuitions accross the board.

Am I exagerating, overreacting? What can you expect when there is no real life evidence that the less expensive college doesn't deserve the recognition.