When accreditation is gained or lost.

It seems to me that when schools/employers/HR people check your degree, if they type in your school and it shows up unaccredited (even though it was accredited at the time you obtained your degree) you are "out of luck"

Wouldn't this also work in someone's favor if they got their degree from an unaccredited institution who later gained DETC or RA accreditation?

 

Most scenarios are unique and will depend upon the institution doing the checking and the nature of the position, there isn’t going to be a cut and dry answer.

I have begun helping organizations with this type of thing, and my current advice, which is intended to lean to giving the applicant the best possible benefit of the doubt (and I do have EaO insurance) is to accept a degree as credible if the institution currently has accreditation recognized by DoE and CHEA, OR if the institution did at the time of graduation, as long as the accreditation was in good standing at the time of graduation.

 

In theory, what actually matters is your school's accreditation status at the time of your graduation. If you graduated from an accredited school that is now either unaccredited or out of business, the accreditation agency should be able to confirm the school's accredited status at the time of your graduation (and, if your old school is now out of business, the accreditation agency should be holding your records and transcripts). In the real world, however, many employers forget to check the date of graduation and compare it to the date of accreditation.

 

David: "...my current advice . . . is to accept a degree as credible if the institution currently has accreditation recognized by DoE and CHEA . . . "

John: And then there is the troublesome (to me) matter of schools (at least three of them) that had accreditation from the dubious* World Association of Universities and Colleges until the day they were accredited by DETC. Should a degree awarded the day before the accreditation was switched from WAUC to DETC be accepted as credible?
__________
* Among many examples are the facts that WAUC accredited the totally fake Edison University, run by convicted LaSalle University founder James Kirk from his federal prison cell, and the equally fake Cambridge State University funded by Columbia State University's "Doctor Dante."

 

If I was involved in an interview process where the top candidate had this degree as his/her only credential, and everything else about the person was the best fit for the position, and World Association of Universities and Colleges was still currently DETC accredited, and this item was discussed with the candidate at full disclosure, I would not recommend disqualifying the candidate based upon their degree accreditation status in this scenario.

If however, the same scenario held except for some reason World Association of Universities and Colleges was no longer DETC (or DoE/CHEA recognized) accredited, then my advice would be to not consider the degree as part of the hiring criteria because the university was not legitimately accredited at the time and the school is not currently legitimately accredited.

 

The first problem is the World Association of Universities and Colleges is an unrecognized accreditation agency which was never accredited by the Distance Education and Training Council nor were they ever recognized by the United States Department of Education or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. The second problem is that you look at accreditation status as of the date of graduation and not as of the date of the interview.

 

My fault, I copied the name of the bogus accreditor and used it as the name of the institution under examination.

 

Should have written:

If I was involved in an interview process where the top candidate had this degree as his/her only credential, and everything else about the person was the best fit for the position, and <insert institution name> was still currently DETC accredited, and this item was discussed with the candidate at full disclosure, I would not recommend disqualifying the candidate based upon their degree accreditation status in this scenario.

If however, the same scenario held except for some reason <insert institution name> was no longer DETC (or DoE/CHEA recognized) accredited, then my advice would be to not consider the degree as part of the hiring criteria because the university was not legitimately accredited at the time and the school is not currently legitimately accredited.

 

The way you are wording this seems a bit confusing. It sounds like you are saying that you'd decide on the validity of the degree based on its current accreditation status, when the accreditation status you're supposed to look at is the situation as it was at the time of the candidate's graduation.

 

Suppose an individual had a bachelor’s degree from an unaccredited religious school but went on to complete a master’s degree at a regionally accredited university. In your screening approach, would the unaccredited degree disqualify the person, or would you examine their educational credentials and work experience in totality.

 

My standard practice is to look at the highest degree earned, so in this case I would consider the Masters degree.

My approach is to give the applicant the best possible benefit of the doubt, so I rarely ‘disqualify’ a person based upon the accreditation status of a degree, I simply don’t consider the degree unless the school is accredited or has gone on to obtain legitimate accreditation.

 

That is my general policy for non-critical positions. For example, if we have a SQL/DBA administrator position that requires an associate’s degree from an accredited school, and I get an applicant with a great resume who ends up being the preferred candidate, and it turns out they got their associates degree from Everest when they were called FMU, and the person graduated one day prior to FMU getting accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools, I would not disqualify them, all other things equal, from candidacy for the position given my logic stated above.

I do agree that your approach is often valid, especially in the educational or vocational arenas where the degree is more of a professional certifying credential. But these cases are so varied; it is a case by case decision in my opinion.

 

The WAUC/DETC story is troubling to me because it indicates that the school is behaving dishonestly. Claiming bogus accreditation is dishonest and misleading. It makes me think less of DETC to see it accredit schools that are behaving dishonestly in this way. If the school will claim bogus accreditation to improve profits, it should cast doubt on the academic integrity of the whole institution. For DETC to then turn around and accredit such a school damages the DETC reputation, IMHO.

 

This is the situation for one of my undergrad degrees. I was working on two degrees simultaneously through a series interesting events. The first was RA. The second (a BS in Management and Ethics) was accredited by the Accrediting Association of Bible Colleges. About a year later, the second college received RA. I haven't thought about it much since then, but if someone cared to dig deep enough, they would find out it was not RA when I graduated. This was not an issue when I applied for graduate school and I doubt my latest employer cared.

 

I would consider this reasonable even though a stricter black letter interpretation could be argued.

 

I used to have HR responsibilities for various companies I worked with or consulted for. My general position on applicants with unaccredited or questionably accredited degrees basically boils down to the institution. If the person claims a degree from an unwonderful school where any reasonable person should realize that the school is bogus or questionable, then I would not further consider the candidate regardless of credentials, under the theory that if he's willing to misrepresent his background in an interview, he will probably be willing to do other unethical things when hired.

If a student graduated from a school that was previously regionally accredited but is not now accredited, usually that means the school is no longer in existence (very few RA schools that lose accreditation are able to stay around more than a year or two after loss of accreditation.) In that case, I would probably look to a credential verification service or some other indication that the person did, in fact, actually have the degree they are claiming. If the school is still around but no longer RA, I would not hold that against the applicant.

If the school was not then accredited but now is, it would be a case-by-case basis. For example, ACCIS, formerly AICS was the first school ever to be accredited by DETC with a previous history with World Association. The school was a piece of shit when it started, and the guy who started it, Lloyd Clayton, runs a number of other unwonderful schools. But ACCIS did, in fact, start running a decent, rigorous educational program according to a number of graduates, and so I wouldn't disqualify someone who had graduated from there close to when it gained DETC accreditation. If they graduated from AICS a number of years before DETC, then there'd have to be a lot of other info to support the applicant.

If it's an RA school that was not yet accredited at the time of the degree, I would probably not hold that against the candidate, but in a tiebreaking situation, it might come into play.

On a separate note, John, I was unaware that DETC was stupid enough to accredit two other schools with a World Association history. One would think they would have learned enough after the first experience, but obviously money or DETC's institutional arrogance is more important than DETC's institutional integrity. Which are the other two schools?

Also, another side note: Has DETC EVER removed accreditation from a school? Last I remember, no one could think of a school they'd decertified. If that's still true, it would't seem to bode well for DETC's integrity, since I find it hard to believe there isn't a single DETC program that's gone bad.

 

DETC pulled the accreditation of Revans, IMC, and the Canadian School of Management--all connected by ownership and "action learning--all on the same day.

LaSalle correspondence university (no connection to the real La Salle in Pennsylvania or the fake one in Lousiana) lost their accreditation in the late 70's or early 80's, when DETC was still the NHSC.

There have been others, but it is hard to tell why because DETC doesn't exactly make things known like the RA's do.

 

I found this an interesting qualification. At USF the business accreditation of your degree is required to be current at the time of application, not the time of graduation.

http://usfweb2.usf.edu/hr/Employment/Faculty/15248.html

 

I understood that to mean that one must hold an AACSB Ph.D. or D.B.A. when they apply for the position (i.e., no ABDs).

 

You may be right. It is fascinating though that it reads both ways, I guess it is good that this isn’t for a communication position.

If this we’re a DL school I’m sure folks would emerge lamenting the obvious low quality of the organization due to its poor communications in job postings.