I have something that I think warrants attention. In some regions, the accrediting bodies require that students have gone through the programs before they grant accreditation. What should we do in this case? Dr. Bear's book helped me tremendously. In some cases, he said that schools were unaccredited, but respectable. If RA is the only thing we look for, Dr. Bear could save lots of time by just including one page in his book. It should read "Go with a regionally accredited school." In my area, there are schools that are not RA, but they are "respected" in the area. They offer associate degrees and career type programs. They allow people to work. Ten years ago, my wife earned a certification in dental assisting from a now defunct institution in Virginia. Although it had no accreditation, she was still able to secure a job. I think there could be some value in non RA degrees. I will conceed, however, that if all other things are equal, I would choose an RA degree. What about new schools that show promise, but are not yet RA? For instance, if "some" members of this forum design a good program that has yet to achieve RA, I would still be inclined to give it its due respect. What does everyone think? Darren Cross
It's a bit of a Catch 22, sort of like finding a job, isn't it? Can't get one until you have experience, and you can't get experience without a job, eh? Can't get accreditation without students, can't get students without accreditation. Students who do go to such a school stand the risk of having hounds at their heels should they ever actually get a degree at such a school. Well, I suspect it doesn't quite work that way. First off, post-secondary education is becoming like the car industry: no room for newcomers, or at least it's pretty hard to become a car manufacturer. How many rocket manufacturers spring into business? Someone would have to be insane to want to start up something as big and complicated as a post secondary institution, and the ones with the money behind them to do so have highly paid people figuring out how to negotiate these tricky turns. Second, one doesn't just open up a degree granting institution tomorrow and start handing out bachelor's, master's, and doctorates. One starts small, builds up a reputation for excellence in a non-degree-granting capacity, and then, after some years of proven ability, starts offering a few degrees, in a few areas once one has enough of an institution to convince the regional accreditors that one is on the right track. Then, if that works, and the RA accrediting bodies buy into it, one slowly expands. Rome wasn't built in a day. Anyone who wants an RA degree in the meantime, while the new guy is building his sea legs, simply goes to the RA accredited institution and forgets about the newcomer. There's a huge demand for education that doesn't lead to degrees, isn't there? That's a perfect place for an institution to cut its teeth. ------------------ Quinn
Originally posted by DCross: I have something that I think warrants attention. In some regions, the accrediting bodies require that students have gone through the programs before they grant accreditation. What should we do in this case? All six regionals, as far as I know, require that a school be operational for some time with enrolled students before it can be considered for candidacy. It's possible that Jones International got around this, but if so, I think that's about the only one. As Quinn said, it's a catch-22. Personally, I'd not go for a non-RA program at least until it reached candidacy, and probably not even then. Too many risks, too many good RA programs to make such a huge investment of *TIME* (not even considering the bucks) on a degree that might be worthless. Dr. Bear's book helped me tremendously. In some cases, he said that schools were unaccredited, but respectable. There are a tiny, tiny number of schools that I think he would now say that about. Two of the ones that showed promise -- Columbia Pacific and Greenwich -- have both done ridiculous things that make them look like mills. Even Cal Coast, probably one of the better unaccredited schools, is pretty questionable in the way they minimize the value of accreditation and claim that the Western Association won't grant accreditation to DL programs. So there's almost nothing to recommend an unaccredited program, and I've noticed that a number of folks (including John) who used to be regulars on a.e.d. and are now regulars here seem to be leaning away from even the more reputable unaccredited programs in favor of RA or modified GAAP accreditation. If RA is the only thing we look for, Dr. Bear could save lots of time by just including one page in his book. It should read "Go with a regionally accredited school." I believe that BG15 pretty much already says that, if you read between the lines. But the value of having the unaccrediteds in there (probably 80% of which are bogus, fraudulent, or less-than-wonderful) is, as much as anything, to warn people away from them. Unfortunately, you often have to read between the lines to figure out that he and Mariah are saying, in so many words, "This school is a fraud." And many people apparently aren't sharp enough to do that. In my area, there are schools that are not RA, but they are "respected" in the area. They offer associate degrees and career type programs. They allow people to work If you're talking about trade schools that have DETC or other USDOEd-approved accreditation, they certainly serve a purpose. However, as evidenced by the many complaints against ICS (now Thomson Direct, I think), DETC accreditation, while looking good on paper, offers little meaningful assurance that there's any kind of quality. Better than nothing, but I see no ongoing evidence that there is anything approaching RA quality on a consistent basis. I think there could be some value in non RA degrees. I will conceed, however, that if all other things are equal, I would choose an RA degree. If you're referring to a tiny handful of legitimate, high quality unaccredited schools, I would agree with you. Looking at the unaccrediteds as a whole, though, there is almost no value in an unaccredited degree. And the "all things being equal" usually isn't because the accredited degree (at the graduate level) is almost always more expensive than the unaccredited one. Still, there is NO value comparision... the RA will never limit your choices, while the unaccredited often will. What about new schools that show promise, but are not yet RA? For instance, if "some" members of this forum design a good program that has yet to achieve RA, I would still be inclined to give it its due respect. A qualified yes... all schools were, at one time, unaccredited. However, telling the legit unaccrediteds from the fraudulent ones isn't easy, even for the trained eye. Westbrook is an excellent example. They have an impressive sounding faculty, claim to be going for regoinal accreditation (which they haven't a snowball's chance in Hell of ever getting), and, on the surface, seem to be well-meaning and legitimate. But a closer look shows a very shady operation that has moved across state lines several times, uses fraudulent accreditation, and other tactics that make it clear that they are *not* interested in legitimacy. I think that IF a new school started up with sufficient funding, high academic standards, some sort of legitimate third-party oversight (such as regular, meaningful peer review of curriculum, faculty, and teaching methods by RA schools, for example) right from the beginning, that would be a good sign that the program is headed in the right direction. But even so, it would not be without risk for the early students. Darren Cross[/B][/QUOTE]
I tend to agree, and only under rare and unusual circumstances would I elect to pursue or recommend a non RA degree. I will say, however, that there is a certain level of interest when I hear of a new program, especially one that shows promise. As I have stated in other threads, I think that the fights that exsist among RA schools are even sadder. I will be pursuing Touro's PhD in Business Admin in beginning in March. This means that I have accepted that there will many schools that will shun me because of my non AACSB degree. The dean of the Program at Touro indicated that AACSB will be pursued, but I find it hard to believe that they will ever recieved accreditation. Maryville University in St. Louis seems to be doing everything right, but they are having a difficult time securing accreditation....and they are a Brick and Mortar school. Does anyone see Touro, or any other RA DL PhD program receiving AACSB accreditation? ------------------ Darren Cross BSB-Management, UoP MBA-Fontbonne College
Perhaps there are more than enough RA colleges and universities to serve the US and therefore the catch-22 problem is of little concern. The US has over half of the educational institutions in the world. I've argued before that this huge diversity is an advantage of the US educational system, but I think that we are well over the critical mass of RA institutions to guarantee sufficient competition...especially in view of the growing availability of GAAP DL programs. As competition and need arises, the existing institutions can reinvent and redistribute themselves. That only the truly outstanding new institutions would be able to break through the catch-22 barrier and enter the RA club does not seem such a bad thing. I would add that the RA associations have done a poor job of educating the public about the significance of regional accreditation and that they should act in concert to raise awareness. It is too easy for a sleazy school to tout its "national" accreditation as being superior to mere regional accreditation.
Ah yes the famous "Catch-22", currently here in California we have that arrangment. There is one new school nad one soon to open in this situation. Both plan extension programs that include on-line classes (or so they say). Cal State - Monterey Bay (open) UC- Merced (open soon) Neither has accredidation at this time, while CSUMB is in candidacy. Based on other comments in other threads, should any one even consider them before they become RA? One CSUMB has alredy had a "time bomb" go off relating to DL (see thread on MIGS) . Will they become RA? I would bet that they will, because of the state sponsorship. Okay, enough sarcasm, currently in California, there is an RA school that offers at least up to a masters level within 50 miles of 90% of the POPULATION. Except for the very far northern and southeastern corners, within 50 miles of almost anywhere. At the community college level and CSU program this is at a cost of $15 to $50/credit, transferrable through out the system. Unless you want to study a mechanical trade or court reporting, or dental office work, the use of non-RA programs can only be attributed to personnel desire. Unfortunately, other parts of the country do not have this choice, and perhaps for them a non-RA program can be of some use, providing they understand that it might have limitations (see Oregon, now go home! as the border sign used to say). For personnel growth and if in any area (say southeastern Arizona) where there are no RA schools within reach, a respectable non-RA DL program could have some use. ------------------ M. C. (Mike) Albrecht, PE
If there is going to be homogeneity amongst the universities, I agree. More of the same in terms of methodology and party line does not make the system any better than it already is. I can see a few situations that call for consideration that currently are completely ignored by the traditional accredited system, but these situations are, by definition, rare enough that they can continue to be ignored without anyone in control losing any sleep. ------------------ Quinn
But I believe that it is possible to achieve candidacy before the first class graduates. CSU Monterey Bay was a WASC candidate by the time it graduated its initial class. But yeah, I suppose that it is possible to have graduated from a new school that achieved candidacy after you left. I guess that means that technically you didn't graduate from an accredited school, though I expect that most universities and employers will treat you as if you had. Avoid using the situation as a stalking horse for non-accredited programs in general, for a starter. The situation you cite is unusual and has little bearing on the majority of non-accredited DL schools. But if they think that they can confuse prospective students by claiming to be new and on an accreditation track, then they will do so. That means that strong skepticism in these cases is prudent. If a school is claiming to be new, on an accreditation track but not yet a candidate for accreditation, the student will have to demand alternative assurances of credibility. Programs and faculty will have to be examined in detail. Colleagues and professionals in your field will have to be consulted. And the student will need to know who is backing the effort. Real universities rarely arise from a vacuum. CSU Monterey Bay had no problem since everyone knows the California State University system. The President of the United States was the speaker at CSUMB's opening ceremonies, for God's sake. Western Governors' University has all those western governors. It has the regional accreditors specially creating IRAC around it. The US Open University is backed up by the highly-credible UK Open University. Other new start ups have corporate backing (don't tell Andy). But if a school pops out of nowhere, appears fully formed on the internet, and claims to offer Ph.D.s in every conceivable field, be very very skeptical. That just doesn't happen in real life. Chances are that it's being operated out of the back room of an insurance office or something.
