Specialized Accreditation?

What does everyone here think about specialized accrediting bodies for certain professions such as engineering, social work, law, business, psychology, education, etc.? I feel these specialized bodies started out with good intentions. However, it seems they have become special interest groups who determines who can become part of a profession and who can not. In turn, these bodies have become monopolies. Also, it is my belief that many of these accreditors stiffle the progress of distance learning programs and many need to update their views on distance learning. I know one can not become a physician through distance learning, but in other fields, many professions can be learned through distance learning. What do you all think?

 

Actually, you can become a physician through distance learning -- or you can at least get your MD degree that way, but would still have to do labs and internship and residency the old-fasioned, in-person way -- but just not in all U.S. states. Some states will allow it, some won't. Just depends.

The notion of specialized accrediting bodies practicing a sort of protectionism over their fields is nothing new. The ABA and the AMA have raised it to an artform. Irksome though it may be, it seems not to be getting any worse lately than it has ever been... or so it is my opinion.

Just curious: What have you noticed, specifically, that would suggest otherwise?

 

Now AACSB(business),APA,AMA,ABA, et. al, all would say that they are defending thier academic standards. Indeed in the case of AACSB and APA there are many accrediated DL programs. Some professional organizations are changing, for example AACSB has drastically changed their accrediation guidelines in recent years. One must remember many of these organizations are old and are very slow to move forward. I do believe things will get better for DL, I just don't think you will ever see a DL MD/DO degree in the US and for plenty of good reason IMHO.

 

I tend to think that any additional, specialized accreditation beyond institutional accreditation is usually a good thing (are there any NA schools with specialized accreditation?).

I sometimes think the ABA is way too impressed with itself for its own good, and not just for its obstinate refusal to even consider accrediting DL programs. They (ABA) got into a huge pissing match with a residential, state-approved law school in Massachusetts, the Massachusetts School of Law, who sued the ABA over their refusal to accredit the school.

Amicus Motion.

Then again, MSL has a fairly dismal pass rate on the Bar Exam, so I have to wonder if the ABA actually does know what it's doing.

 

Sorry, I can't agree with you there. For one thing, I think the professional associations have always intended to be THE gatekeepers for their respective professions (among other more laudable goals). For another, I think you have the progression exactly backwards -- despite the intentions of these organizations, I think the professions are generally more open today than ever before, due to social changes such as civil rights legislation and the Sixties counterculture (with its erosion of reverence for authority).

As for "monopolies" -- again, I don't agree. What power these professional organizations have is dependent on public opinion and government actions. Certainly, these groups attempt to influence the public and government, and often are successful. In the long run, however, they are engaged in a process of negotiation with government and the public. Those professional organizations that thought they could have their own way have had to change or die (for a couple of examples, Google "riverboat Pilots Benevolent Organization" or "air traffic controllers strike").

You're absolutely right! Damn the ABA and their stultifying effect on legal education! As any businessperson will tell you, America's biggest problem is that we simply do not have enough lawyers! Fight the power, brother!

Seriously, I disagree with you here too. Like it or not, distance learning has "something to prove" relative to traditional academia, thanks to degree mills and other factors. Also, despite the problems most of us on this Web site have had, it's not really all THAT hard to attend classes and graduate from a traditional "bricks & mortar" (B&M) college or university -- millions of people do it every year.

As long as the public and governmental bodies see B&M college graduates as the "safe" choice, distance learning programs will have an uphill struggle. This will lessen over time as we honest distance learners show that "distance learning degree" does not equal "academic fraud", but I don't think DL will ever be seen as fully equal to B&M education. I don't think it should, either.

 

You're right. Professional accredition is an evil totalitarian plot to keep out the DLers.

 

I wouldn't include engineering in this list, although there is no doubt that ABET is reluctant to accredit distance programs in engineering. Consider the following points:

(1) The mainstream engineering establishment (which includes ABET) is concerned about falling engineering enrollments, and declining numbers of PE candidates. In this case, the "gatekeepers" are more concerned about getting people in than keeping them out.

(2) The engineering establishment has enthusiastically embraced DL degrees at the master's level. You can now get a DL MS degree in a wide range of engineering fields, from practically any type of university, from local state schools to prestigious private schools.

So why aren't there more ABET-accredited DL bachelor's degree programs? One word: labs. The engineering establishment feels strongly that undergraduate engineering students need to get some hands-on experience with engineering tools and techniques in a well-equipped laboratory environment, under the technical guidance of an experienced supervisor. Unfortunately, it is difficult to deliver this type of experience by DL. ABET can and does accredit DL engineering BS programs that have residency requirements for labs.

ABET would have to change its policies regarding labs to facilitate the accreditation of DL bachelor's programs. But it's likely that most engineering employers, licensing boards, graduate schools, etc. would oppose such a move. Engineering employers, for example, typically want newly-minted engineers to have some hands-on experience, not just book-learning.

 

Even the legal profession tends, in many states, to be more liberal that the ABA in deciding who gets to be a lawyer.

I have an ABA J.D. from the University of New Mexico. I received a VERY solid education that, frankly, I doubt I'd have gotten without the ABA setting clear standards.

But I got my degree at a time when schools, especially state schools, were willing and able to subsidize legal education to a vastly greater extent than they generally seem to be able to do now. If I had to bear most or all of the actual cost of my J.D. myself, as most private school and many state school students must now do, it wouldn't be worth it. It's just too expensive!

So I support alternative forms of legal education. I would like to see more states establish full fledged clerkship programs, for instance. I also think that a lot more could be done following the example of California's State Bar accreditation program.

If I ever get to the point of writing that J.S.D. dissertation, one possible piece of research I'd love to do is to determine whether graduates of CalBar schools are a s successful, ethical, and satisfied as graduates of California ABA schools.

 

If we still don't have a DL, ABA accredited law school law school in 10 years I'd be willing to criticize them. But not yet.

In my opinon, Concord Law School is the only one even worth consideration of accreditation. And they are, especially in the law school world, very new and unproven. Drexel University is starting a law school this year. There is really little doubt they will receive accreditation - but by ABA standards they may not even apply until 2008.

As for the others, just look at William Howard Taft for example. I am not saying anything about the quality of education there, because I do not know. But their web site looks like it could have been created in an "Introduction to Computers" class at the high school level.

DL law schools need to, as a group, act like they deserve professional recognition. Then, slowly, it should come.

 

A few. The most prominent one that I'm aware of is the Academy of Art University in San Francisco. They currently have institutional accreditation by ACICS (they are a WASC applicant, have a site visit scheduled, but haven't been granted candidacy yet). But they are also accredited by NASAD (the National Association of Schools of Art and Design) and by FIDER (the Foundation for Interior Design Education and Research). FIDER accreditation is important to licensure as an interior designer in some states. And while they are busy flirting with WASC, the Academy of Art is also a candidate with the NAAB (the National Architecture Accreditation Board). In most states that's necessary for licensure as an architect.

http://www.academyart.edu/aboutus/accreditation.asp

BTW, I was walking around San Francisco this weekend and there seemed to be an Academy of Art building on every block. It's growing in SF like fungus! The distinctive Academy of Art logo (red with two A's kind of nested inside each other) is as ubiquitous as stop lights downtown. I noticed a new building (actually an older building with a new sign) in North Beach near the prestigious San Francisco Art Institute (there's another building near fisherman's wharf), and at least three large office-type buildings (at least one of which they own and fully occupy) near the SF Museum of Modern Art. They tell me that if you add up all the offices, studios, galleries, computer labs and dormitories (named for famous artists, there's a Rodin dorm for example), there's more than 20 sites around the city, all linked together by a campus shuttle bus service. It's the largest art school by enrollment in the United States, a veritable art-empire, and it offers a spectacular list of (pretty expensive) DL programs (not all of which have professional accreditation because of studio-access issues):

http://online.academyart.edu/degrees.html

Another NA school with professional accreditation is Hollywood's Musician's Institute. It's ACICS and NASM (National Association of Schools of Music). The Musician's Institute is interesting because it doesn't emphasize classical music like so many other music schools. It teaches things like guitar and keyboards and is very tight with the local LA recording industry. The tunes on your ipod probably have graduates of this school playing in them.

http://www.mi.edu/

And (this is especially for FWD) both of these babies are CA-approved by the (boo! hiss!) BPPVE.

 

Vincey,

I don't know. Concord's numbers HAVE improved somewhat in the last Bar and FYLEX cycles; certainly the school has the financial backing to make it work if anyone can.

But resources, while critically important, are not the only indicia of probable success. Unaccredited Oak Brook charges well less than HALF what Concord charges and has much better Bar numbers.

If I were looking for a D/L law school and could stand Oak Brook's endless, pounding theological message, I'd go with THEM long before I'd even think about Concord.

But I really wonder whether an entirely D/L J.D. is such a good idea.

 

But don't hold your breath waiting, in fact if you're a betting man you might bet on that 10 years going by with nary a nod toward DL by the ABA. The ABA just plain doesn't like DL. Presently they refuse to approve even paralegal programs offered by distance.

Quoted from:
http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/paralegals/career.html

Look at the language usage, "correspondence" ... "home study programs" ... not neccessarily negative terms, but they have their connotations. Those are exactly the terms most people associate with matchbook covers and late-night commercials featuring Sally Struthers. Do you think the ABA was not aware of those perceptions when they crafted that part of their paralegal FAQ? (Bruce is right, the ABA is far too impressed with themselves.)

Granted, paralegals are still allowed to function in their field without having attended an ABA-approved program. But you would think that ABA-approval might give someone new to that field an edge, no? They say they don't disallow some paralegal coursework through DL, but a fairly quick look at some of the programs they approve shows those programs that do offer some DL don't offer much and what they do offer by distance is mostly limited to non-major courses. The organization to which they refer questioners interested in DL makes it clear that they are not an accrediting body and that not all their suggested programs include ABA approval. Guess which ones? You got it, the ones offered mostly or completely by DL.

Some paralegal educational programs are intensive, but regardless of their rigor not one of them comes close to an education in law. So the point being, if the ABA refuses to approve even good DL paralegal programs then what would make anyone think they would even consider approving DL law education anytime soon?


Kit