Why isn't regional accreditation enough for a DL degree to be accepted by a B&M?

I'm having a difficult time understanding why a B&M institution will not consider a person with a DL degree for employment, or sometimes even transfer credit, when the DL school is regionally accredited. I've heard the reasons they give, but it still bugs me. The B&M schools are RA and have the same accreditation as many RA, DL schools, yet B&M administrators still consider a DL degree inferior. This prejudice is even directed at DL schools, such as Capella, that publish peer reviewed research papers. Do you have any insights on that? We tell each other it's changing, but do you think it will ever really change?

 

Possible reasons:

1. Because the only real purpose of accreditation is to allow the distribution of financial aid.

2. Because many of the regional accreditation boards are staffed by people with questionable degrees themselves or with significant blemishes on their records.

3. Because the standards that regional accreditation hold schools to don't necessarily correlate to quality education. (which is why professional accreditation (ABA, AHA, AACSB) is far more important at grad level.

Schools are judged by the quality of faculty they attract, the funding they obtain and the cumulative efforts of their graduates (where they land in placement and the work they do once there.)

Capella is a good school with a good initial track record, but they are new to the family and are not in our lifetimes going to stack up to Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, Stanford, The Ohio State University, Carnegie Mellon etc. These schools have the pick of the available academics and support staff in the job market and aren't going to choose someone from a school that doesn't have the same general legacy or lacking that, candidates that reinforce the existing legacy.

It will change when those schools that have the legacy, run their own DL programs and open doctoral study. Until then we'll just have to deal and be grateful that we can get education.

 

I don't believe there's a blanket exclusion of DL degrees. It really depends on the school's prestige. Places like Emory, Duke, Stanford and so on are almost impossible places for any degree holder to get a permanant position, even for their own graduates. I remember reading a few years ago of a student movement at Emory to keep a popular visiting professor with an Oxford doctorate. He still had to go. On the other hand, regional schools and community colleges are less restrictive. You can find many permanant faculty, even dept. chairs, with degrees from Walden, Capella and similar schools, especially in practitioner programs like CJ or education. I was once considering Capella for a CJ doctorate and searched around to see if anyone was teaching with that credential and found quite a few...nothing top tier, but still in higher education. As a side note, there's a lot to be said for community college and tech school teaching as an effective way to make a mark in the world.

 

I'm not sure that I'm ready to accept the premise. What evidence do you have that supports this question?

 

I would be very happy to be proven wrong. (Happens all the time...sigh) Also, I'll be the first to admit that my experience in this area is quite limited. Here's what I am basing my initial assumption on:

1. Personal experience. I've tried to talk to several local universities, two of which were my alma maters, and the deans would not even talk to me, let alone give me an interview, when they found out the degree I am working on is DL.

2. I have read many posts on this BB and others that support that claim.

This is a very limited and subjective basis, I'll admit.

 

I was not asking for a job, I was asking whether they would consider someone for a position with a DL degree. I was mostly asking for guidance. Two separate schools and initially they answered my questions but they would not even give me 10 minutes to talk as soon as the DL word was used. I found it quite odd. Granted, two experiences does not make the basis for an accurate generalization.

Ouch...good point. Love that: ""the plural of anecdote is not data"

EVERYONE PLEASE NOTE: This is not an attack on DL. It is merely another idea I would like to hear some opinions on. I thought that this was a well accepted generalization.

 

Probably bias against both DL and for-profit. Yes, I was asking if they would consider someone with a DL degree for a faculty position. One said no and would speak to me no further and the other would not even talk to me once the DL word was used. These were both 4 year, RA, B&M schools. I might find different results if I tried more schools, don't know.

 

Thanks Steve, I appreciate your insight.

 

The "prejudice" you speak of seems mostly directed towards DL NA degrees. One way to change that arbitrary policy is by filing a complaint with the state regulatory agency where the RA school sits. Since NA degrees also derive their authority under federal law that would be another avenue to pursue. I think a graduate that has been issued credentials that conform to federal guidelines has a reasonable expectation that his or her credentials be accepted in every state. This isn't to say that a DL graduate with poor academic scores should be accepted into a RA program, only that the credential be recognized.

 

The reason I made that small challenge is that I've heard so much about very well qualified people applying for university teaching jobs who get turned away without even an interview. These are people with classroom based degrees from well known schools and they're not even getting an interview. I've been told that a lot of it has to do with the "fit" between the departments needs and the applicants experience and area of expertise. If you apply for a university teaching position and you get turned away you can not simply assume it's because your doctoral degree was earned at a distance.

 

Good point. However, my experience with both schools changed dramatically when I mentioned that the degree I was working on was DL. It appears that DL had a lot to do with it.

 

One strategy...

One way to go is to look at your local 2-year schools (there's more jobs there) and apply for adjunct teaching positions in whatever you're qualified to teach. You can also email the dept. heads and attach your resume or vitae. Then be alert at the start of academic terms and be prepared to take a last minute offer. Sometimes the depts get stuck at the last minute. Do a good job and make an positive influence on your students and bosses and they will keep you working. Eventually, when a fulltime spot opens you will be a strong candidate. The 2-year schools are most interested in teaching ability and usefulness and are happy to give a job to a good adjunct employee over a someone who might have a better degree...the 2-year schools don't need researchers and they're not competing for status.

The fact is that RA itself is not good enough to enter high-brow academia fulltime. PhDs from the very best schools aren't likely to get the job either. It's very crowded at the top. Many top scholars drift from fellowship to fellowship and have a hard life, and would love a tenured job...but there just aren't too many of those to have.

 

These are 2 totally different issues.

Job: I think it's important to point out that one thing DL degrees lack is an opportunity to conduct research under tenured faculty in person. For some paths, not all, that will be relevant. I don't think it's anything to be upset about, but if you want to be a PhD-holding tenured Psychology professor some day, you need to attend college/university as a student where you will gain experience in a lab. Not all education is equal, and not all education prepares you for all opportunities. I don't think this is a whine, I think it's doing your due diligence ahead of time and choosing the best path for your own career goals. Clearly you can't expect a university to hire someone under qualified when they have scores of well-qualified applicants.

Transfer credit:
I honestly have never, ever, not even once on this board -or any other- heard of an RA college denying transfer credit from another RA college on the basis of it being distance learning. *exception lab science* Why?

First off, 98% of public colleges and universities in the United States offer distance learning.

Secondly, registrars don't have the time (or inclination IMO) to investigate the mode of delivery. Transcripts simply don't reveal this fact, so they would need to be hyper-motivated to even identify the mode of learning. (my community college offers no less than 5 modes of instructional delivery, all carrying the same course numbers)
And why would they? They are looking at RA, course numbers, department prefixes, incoming college policy re transfer, lab credits, and number of credits. MOST states have sophisticated transfer guides online and MOST community colleges guarantee transfer (as in "guarantee or your money back"). This is all built on the course outcomes/competency, not mode of delivery.

Thirdly, sometimes people assume causation. For example, if you read enough college admission pages, you'll start to discover that they all their own policies. Not all colleges even accept transfer credit- so it's easy for someone to make a leap and assume that a denial of credit is due to "distance learning" when that is possibly irrelevant.

 

One example does not create the rule.

 

I do know of several people who obtained tenure track positions at respectable B & M state and private universities. I personally don't know of anyone from Northcentral University that has obtained a tenure track position.

 

Of course, thank you. I'm pleasantly surprised at all the flak this thread has generated. Most of these counter arguments that have been offered are exactly what I was hoping to hear. It's great to know that my experience is not the norm. Thanks so much.

 

Yea, I don't think it has ever happened. Fortunately, that's not my goal. I've really posed this question just to learn, once again, from all of the great minds on this board.