It appears that the strategy being employed by a number of institutions currently defined as “less than wonderful” (and even some that aren’t so defined, but should be) is “just tell us what the criteria for legality or legitimacy is, and we’ll find a way to fudge it.” As such, definitions such as GAAP, are being exploited and risk losing any significance. Moreover, and with no disrespect intended to Dr. Bear, the subtle and tongue-in-cheek “less than wonderful” definition is far too vague, and may actually be enticing to a prospective student with low self-esteem. I believe a clearer line must be drawn, and I therefore humbly propose a new term: GAAS For an institution to pass GAAS it must be Generally Accepted As Stinky. Institutions that pass GAAS are rather like pornography in the respect that we may not be easily able to define them, but we know them when we see them. In addition, GAAS is non-discriminatory; just because an institution is DETC accredited, meets GAAP, or holds any other form of accreditation, does not preclude it from also passing GAAS. The advantage of GAAS is that it is constantly evolving to keep pace with the changes that so many institutions (new and old, foreign and domestic) are currently undergoing. Therefore, in response to each unique situation, the “S” may refer to any number of terms from a long and ever–changing list. Some of the more applicable ones (in no particular order) are: Sciolistic Substandard Sappy Scummy Spurious Smelly Scrofulous Sleazy Scoundrelly Scabby Scurrilous Silly Subterfuge Scary Senseless Swine Smirchy Slop Skimpy Scatological Stupid Shaky Satanic Smutty Skatole Squalid Scheming Sucks Shabby Smegma Swindle Screwy Shallow Sinful Shady Shameful Swag Snot Sordid Shameless Syphilitic STD SOB Sputum Sneaky Spew Sword of Damocles Scandalous Suctorial Sham Scarring Shifty Sphincteric Shoddy Shitty …or simply a Stiver, or a Scam, not to mention the innumerable Semi-infinite, Self-flagellating, Super-ludicrous, Subpoenable possibilities. Oh, and to avoid any legal liability, the sub list contains the terms Super, Special, and Superb. Gus Sainz
Hi Gus, More to the point, were the mumbo-jumbo of RA's more clearly defined then others might have a chance of breaking the strangle-hold the RA's apply. Spend US$30 with NAPNSC to get their information packs and read of moving goalposts and sideline tactics just as NAPNSC looked as though they might get close to US DoEd recognition when Cal Coast U. was a member. Actually, "less-than-wonderful" were the RA's list of points for "Electronic Delivery" ... of course, not actually defining anything that could be applied by competing educational institutions. More "jobs for our own boys", I'm afraid, so long as you're a member of the RA Club. Regards, Neil Hynd
Neil Hynd, Ph.D. (Century) writes, in part, More to the point, were the mumbo-jumbo of RA's more clearly defined then others might have a chance of breaking the strangle-hold the RA's apply. The current (2001) Higher Education Directory lists 91 accrediting agencies other than the regionals that have been approved by the U.S. Department of Education -- every single one of them approved (or reapproved) since NAPNSC (National Association for Private Nontraditional Schools and Colleges) was rejected by the Department of Education. What on earth could be going on here? John Bear, who has read through the $30 packet from NAPNSC
I am tremendously fond of the GAAS concept. Thank you. May we call you Mr. GAAS -- Gus "Always Acceptable" Sainz?
It's a conspiracy, I tell you, a conspiracy! Those evil RA schools are out to get those poor innocent unaccredited schools. Tom Nixon
As usual, Neil conveniently omits that his doctoral alma mater (Century University) has claimed "accreditation" from the most decidely non-wonderful Accrediting Commission International. I know little about NAPNSC, but at least they have their act together enough to even *apply* for DOE approval. Hey Neil...has ACI, the "accreditor" of your doctoral alma mater, ever applied for DOE approval? Bruce
Nothing like sticking to the topic, eh Bruce ? Or in your case ignoring it completely. Try this. Write a critique comparing the NEA / blackboard.com DE guidelines with the RA ones, then I might think you'll have something useful to say. If I hear nothing, I'll assume you've got nothing to offer. Which is what I expect. Good luck. Neil
I agree with you completely Tom. I also see a conspiracy among all properly accredited schools (RA, GAAP, etc.) to destroy all those poor little worthless schools. Schools which could not gain proper accreditation if they tried because their criteria for obtaining a degree is so substandard, their equivalent of a Ph.D. would be like getting a GED from a community college. Perhaps the FBI should be informed about this conspiracy, specifically the X-Files Division. Maybe Scully and Molder could find the aliens behind it all. Russell
Funny Russell, I thought perhaps you might have correlated the lack of "valid" DL's doctorates in the USA as per a very long recent thread with the efforts of the RA's to prevent any cf. NAPNSC and Cal Coast. Which is why people find they have to go to South Africa, Australia, Timbuktoo or anywhere but not the USA - and certainly not the alternative American state-licensed/approved ones (perish the thought) !!! Is that an indictment or what ??? If it's round, looks like an orange, smells like an orange, is orange in colour maybe ..... you can finish the rest ! Cheers, Neil
Neil: It is possible, however, for something to be round, to look like an orange, to be orange in color, and actually be a rotten orange. Regarding state approved degrees, they do indeed meet the needs of a very few, as can be seen via a quick search at www.google.com (or other search engines). However, recognition of these degrees will be very limited, as recent research data provided by John Bear and Rich Douglas has revealed. Russell
