Are there any RA's that are "mills"?

Thought I would ask this of the more informed...

Are there any RA or otherwise (DETC, etc...) schools that are so bad that they could be considered mills?

I always hear that the accreditation bodies do a good job, but are there any schools that have some how managed to maintain RA even with an extremely lax and subpar policy?

 

I remember growing up that adults would refer to one being "well educated" or "not very well educated" when refering to one who was a college graduate. The schools never came into play. It was what one got out of the insitution that counted.

Granted degree mills weren't on every corner then.

 

The short answer: Of course not!

The long answer: You're asking two different questions. First there's the question of whether any regionally-accredited (RA) school could be considered a "mill." The answer to that is a resounding categorical "no." If you understand what it means to be RA, and if you're clear about what a "mill" is, you would be forced to conclude that it's simply not possible to be both.

The second question would be whether it's possible for an RA school to be bad. That's another kettle of fish altogether. Being RA ensures that the school conforms to certain minimum standards that the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) and/or it Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)-approved agencies say will ensure a competent higher education. Some schools do that better than others. Some not only meet USDE/CHEA-approved standards, but exceed them greatly. Others just barely meet such standards. It's fair to say, therefore, that the ones that just barely comply are somehow "worse" than the ones that greatly exceed them. But the standards themselves probably ensure that none of them are inherently "bad." I mean, that's the whole point of establishing the standard in the first place: So that none of them will be "bad;" and so that, therefore, a certain minimum quality of education will be ensured.

So the long answer is "no," too... but with the understanding that some RA schools are lightyears better than others; with none of them being so bad that a good education couldn't be gotten from any of them.

Finally, all of the above assumes that the RA institution is fully complying with accreditation standards and isn't about to lose its accreditation. The period between when an institution starts to screw-up to the point that it could lose its accreditation, and when it finally actually does, can be lengthy. If a student should happen to sign-up with an institution that's on its way to losing its accreditation, I suppose the possibility of it becoming, along the way, what any reasonable person might consider "bad" exists. But even then, it seems to me a small likelihood that any institution that was once good enough to be regionally-accredited would, at any point along its path to decline sufficient to lose its accreditation, ever be bad enough to be considered a "mill."

That, it seems to me, is both a cogent commentary about the likely sensibilities of anyone who is of sufficient character and integrity to ensure that his/her institution meets regional accreditation standards, as well as about just how bad and worthless "mills" are. If one truly understands what a mill is, there just doesn't seem any possibility that a regionally-accredited (or even formerly regionally-accredited) institution could ever be confused with a mill.

 

I think it just depended upon in what kinds of circles one traveled. In my circles, the term "well-educated" always pertained to the quality of one's higher education, not merely whether one had it at all. Obviously, we traveled in different circles.

Again, obviously in your world, but certainly not in mine.

That's categorically true about any education... to a point. But getting good grades, alone, evidences that the person at least understood the education. Accreditation ensures that what the person learned was appropriate. Beyond that, it's not the education's fault if said person, post graduation, fails to employ the lessons learned. Moreover, his/her doing so does not make the education substandard.

And they're not now, either. Don't fool yourself. The Internet just makes it seem so. But back when they were advertised in the backs of popular magazines and on matchbook covers, there were a bunch of 'em, too.

 

The answer depends on one's definition of mill. Sometimes the word mill is used to mean a school that is simply inferior to what may be accepted.

It has been argued by some that a few of the DETC accredited schools are very questionable. This does not seem to be the case for accreditations granted over the last few years. It was argued for some of the older accreditations.

Personally, I would not call any accredited school a mill.

 

Sometimes the terms "diploma mill" and "degree mill" are used to describe otherwise accredited schools who put out a lot of graduates. This criticism comes from those who would measure quality by how restrictive a school is in its admissions--instead of more properly measuring its outputs.

 

Depends on how you define 'mill'.

If you mean complete, degrees-for-dollars scams, then no. The accreditors make that impossible.

On the other hand, I do think that a few policies and practices conducted by some accredited schools are 'millish' in nature.

I can easily imagine situations where, if I was hiring or making admissions decisions, I'd want to see an applicant's transcripts to determine exactly what classes they have credit for and how they earned it.

In other words, I'm not 100% comfortable with everything that the accreditors accept. I may want to see certain subjects covered in a degree program, I might be convinced that labs and hands-on exercises can't be done away with, or I might believe that particular testing instruments aren't credible. I also have strong misgivings about the trend towards masters degrees gradually becoming first-degrees in their subjects.

I don't want to create unnecessary hostility on the board, so I won't be more specific than that.

 

Re: Re: Are there any RA's that are "mills"?

I'm not certain precisely what you mean by this. Do you mean the trend toward masters degrees in "X" without having previously earned a Bachelors degree in "X?" I would agree that some jumps are too big, at least for most people. In this regard I like the use of Postgraduate Diploma programs such as are available through many British, Australian and South African universities. These are designed specifically to help people transition into a new field and are seen as prerequisites in many cases.
Jack

 

In the eyes of the USDE no.

In the eyes of some people... that's debatable.

For instance, some see UoP as a mill, others see NA schools as a mill, and then others lump all online programs in the mill category.

 

Re: Re: Are there any RA's that are "mills"?

Well, like others have said "mill' is a loosely use term.

For the sake of this topic I would suggest mill/millish being a school that is/does:

1. Has "easy" portfolio reviews, giving far too much credit. KW -even though not RA- would be the best example I can think of besides blatant mills.

2. Has an extremely easy exam for credit program... Not CLEP or DANTES but a exam program of their own with very easy or sub par tests.

3. Offers upper level classes i.e. 300, 400, and higher classes that should in all reality be 100, 200 lower level classes.

4. Takes any sort of outside credits / degree with out review or without much of a review. i.e. A RA school that will take a KW or god forbid St. Regis(the mill) BS as fulfilling the requirements for entering a RA masters program.

4a. Takes any outside credits and applies them to a RA BS/Masters.


5. Is known for passing students no matter what their actual class performance was. i.e. High performing athletes.


6. Lets cheating go unchecked. i.e. "Take home" tests or un-proctored online tests.



I know #5 and #6 goes on to some degree at just about every school as there will always be *some* cheating and *some* special allowances for certain students.



Now that I've defined what I'm looking for is there any way a RA school could get by with any of this behavior? Are there any schools like this today?

If so, what can be done to fix it?

 

I have such a degree myself (from U. London - Birkbeck) and I agree. This is a topic that Peter French has raised many times.

I would certainly not say that Birkbeck is a mill. Indeed, I'm quite proud of the institution and its role. But my Birkbeck Master's degree is not worthy of that designation.

 

Re: Re: Re: Are there any RA's that are "mills"?

Pretty much any school with a strong sports program -- no matter what their reputation -- is going to be guilty of number 5. I graduated from University of Miami, which has excellent academic quality, an excellent football team... and each football team member had their own full team of paper-writers and test -takers. Every so often noise gets made about this kind of stuff but it never really changes.