Superiority Complex?

I have been visiting “Degree.Net’s” discussion board for some time now and I have some concerns about the attitudes portrayed toward the ideal intention of post-secondary education itself.

Meaning…why ruin or tarnish an educational institution before it even has a chance to be accessed by an accrediting agency?

For example, if a newly formed and licensed institution is located within SACS jurisdiction, and SACS frowns upon 100% DL institutions (see tread: http://www.degreeinfo.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=4587) then the DETC would be the obvious alternative. The DETC, however, requires that “applicant institutions must document TWO years” of operation (see .pdf from DETC here: http://www.detc.org/downloads/accredhandbook/9.%20Accreditation%20Standards.PDF) .

Before your peck your keyboards in response, please consider the following. Yes, I understand that the “newly formed and licensed institution” may in fact flop and prove to be a failure, but that does not remove the principal ideals of OBJECTIVE analysis.

Are many of you using this discussion board elitists?

There are a number of institutions of higher learning that provide a level of education equal to those that have the COSTLY “regional accredited” stamp of approval!

I would rather share a tea with one who would not be so quick to judge and criticize, than some of you who carry sophisticated PhD titles. Maybe a prerequisite to any degree should be a course on “ethics” and/or empathy?

Please reconsider your paradigm before you share your opinions in the future.

 

Just surf on by:

• If I see you tomorrow on some street in town
  Pardon me if I don't say hello
  I belong to another it wouldn't look so good
  To know someone I'm not supposed to know.
  
  etc.

(for all you country music fans...)

 

Perhaps you'd care to share the names of these institutions, and how you know they are equal to RA schools?


Bruce

 

I didn't know Degree.Net had a discussion board; and as someone who has co-written a book for them, I'd be very interested in accessing it. Could you provide me with a URL?

Thanks.


Cheers,

 

Excuse me Mr. Head

Excuse me Mr. Head.

I follow this discussion board through the “Degree.Net” portal.

[correction: Degreeinfo.com]

Respectfully submitted,

Justsurfing

 

Bruce...example

Bruce,


Example of an institution of higher learning not RA:


Florida Metropolitan University, Orlando, FL ( http://www.fmu.edu )

This may not be an example of a “newly formed” institution I was referring to earlier, as I am afraid some on this discussion board would further tarnish their name.

I don’t have a “dog in the fight,” I just don’t want to “go there.”

 

Florida Metropolitan is owned by Corinthian (Nasdaq: COCO) which has been doing quite well, and announced a stock split on Thursday. A recent article: Enrollment surge boosts Corinthian Colleges.

As discussed here previously, Florida Metropolitan has articulation agreements with certain public universities in Florida. This provides some academic utility to the degrees, which are otherwise of limited value for graduate admissions.

 

Hmmm

Personally for me it is RA, NA or nothing.

However, If people are comfortable with an "unaccredited" school and it meets their needs and wants, go for it.

 

So the question comes back to what unaccredited schools provides as good or better value then the RA choices. With all the schools both accredited and unaccredited discussed here I can't think of one. Could you please enlighten us Justsurfing? Many thanks.

 

Does this board have the power to ruin or even tarnish an educational institution? For that matter, do we even speak with one voice?

Starting a university and offering quality programs is more costly than accreditation. If a school can't afford to qualify for regional accreditation, doesn't that suggest that it's underfunded and that the rest of its programs are probably suffering as a result?

Are you suggesting that students should enroll in schools because they feel sorry for them?

I don't use a paradigm. I have a Weltanshauung.

 

Re: Re: Superiority Complex?

And a most impressive Weltanschauung it is. Mine broke a few years ago--you know, that sort of thing happens to lots of folks in college--but it's back to its old self now, and getting more expansive by the day. This is a good thing, because there's nothing more embarrassing than an undersized Weltanschauung.

You don't get to see very many Weltanschauungs on broadcast television, but they're all over the web; and there are some cable channels that feature them now. They also seem to be a popular literary topic--seems like half the books written today are about somebody's Weltanschauung.



Cheers,

 

Re: Re: Superiority Complex?

This is an interesting post by an anti-elitist?

When you surf out here you have to careful as you don't really know exactly what is in the water...just like at degreeinfo which can become degreeinferno without warning.

Degreemisinfo it is not.

Steve must be trucking .....

PF

 

And then, and then

people come here and she says to you

of knowing already

every law of the things;

and all you know,

they boast a blind pride

of truth

made of empty formulas.

- Mr. Weltanshauung

 

Re: Bruce...example

You would not risk tarnishing the name any further if their were nothing inherent in the school to tarnish itself. The worse that could be said is it is new and unaccredited. That would likely mean that people may be wisely recommended to avoid it at this point in favor of accredited alternatives. With no description of the schools we have no more knoweldge of whether this is a NCU situation where they are a serious effort that has potential or some surfer dude running his new university out of his Dad's garage with visions of it one day becoming accredited...maybe.

North

 

Are many of you using this discussion board elitists?

Justsurfing,

I read this board almost daily and I've yet to see any educational institution ruined or tarnished because of Degreeinfo.

Accreditation, be it regional national or Generally Accepted Accrediting Principles, is of great importance to the prospective student. Accreditation or lack of will have significant bearing on the acceptance of the degree and or transfer credits.

I have observed quite a few DL experts, on this board, take the time to offer sound guidance to anyone who asks. Sometimes it may not be the answer one wants to hear and there is sometimes disagreement among members, but if you ask a question you will get an answer. I do not think the members of this board are elitists.

I suspect that there are more than a few members of this board whom are quite capable of teaching a course on ethics.

When deciding on an investment and I see education as an investment, empathy is never a criterion for the decision.

 

I tried to use my new Weltanschauung, but couldn't find the manual or a consultant.

I agree that it takes time to get accredited. While I believe there is a niche for unaccredited (yet state approved) schools, I would not go to one. Also, I would not recommend an unaccredited school to someone that is trying to make a positive change in their lives and the lives of their family- especially if their budget is tight. It is simply too risky a proposition.

All schools start out unaccredited. However, at some point some simply turn to the dark side, and decide to start mimeographing diplomas. Others keep going in the right direction and gain recognized accreditation. The problem is, how do you recognize the good ones from the ones that will turn to the dark side?

 

What's wrong with being an elitist? Some people are born smarter or stronger than others.

 

Yes, some are born smarter or stronger. There is no reason to be arrogant or elitist though.


Just a thought...

"...If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch..."

from If
by Rudyard Kipling

It can be read in its entirety here http://www.favoritepoem.org/poems/kipling/

 

One reason so many people jump to a conclusion around here is because it is one they've drawn many times before! There is very little new brought about here. When someone brings up the inferiority of DETC accreditation, it's not because they're jumping to a conclusion. The topica has been discussed to death! The same goes for less-than-wonderful schools, unaccredited-but-sorta-legitimate schools, etc. The only people who object to this are newbies who rush in with their shiny, newly-found, crummy school, and then get their hopes and ideals shot down in a barrage of experience.

It would help if newbies would read previous posts and get a feel for what's discussed. They might find an opportunity to answer for themselves what they want to know. Also, they might find themselves asking more pointed questions--and getting better answers--than with the old "Does anyone know about...." questions.

 

Stay alert.

This thread is about accreditation. The assertion in the first post was that Degreeinfo trashes non-accredited schools before they have time to become accredited, because they can't afford to become accredited, or something (it was never clear). The complaint was that our skepticism about non-accredited schools is 'elitist'.

But if you want to generalize the idea of 'elitism', the bottom line remains the same.

The distinction between elitism and success is the distinction between boasting and performance.

Elitists want to avoid the necessity of having to perform by closing the doors on competitors a-priori. They defend privilege designed to stack the deck in their (and their offspring's) favor from the start.

Contrast that to individuals who maneuver confidently and never boast, but let their accomplishments speak for them.

One extends opportunity to others, the other restricts it to themselves.

Entrepeneurship can only flourish in an environment of opportunity, and it is entrepeneurship that is the engine of both economic growth and cultural creativity. There simply has to be an openness to new ideas, with the ideas being judged on their own merits rather than by who advanced them.

Getting back to accreditation, I think that the regional accreditors are very open to new entrants. In just the last five years here in California, WASC has accredited ITP and the Pacifica Graduate Institute, the City of Hope/Beckman Institute, San Jose Christian College and more. These are small specialized schools, and none of them are made out of money. But they are accepted if they can demonstrate academic credibility and enough financial and administrative stability to ensure that the school will be around in a few years.

So I deny the argument that accreditation, and the defense of accreditation is essentially elitist. Accreditation is a necessary performance criterion, but it does not close the door to credible new entrants. Instead it welcomes them.

And some of them accomplish quite a bit. The Rand Graduate School in Santa Monica is a national power in public policy. The Pacifica Graduate Institute is the place to go if you are into the kind of things Joseph Campbell was doing. The Monterey Institute of International Studies is internationally known for researching proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, as well as being a dynamite language school. CIIS is strong in Asian studies and is a leading place to study western esotericism. The Salk Institute in San Diego has won Nobel prizes in biology. Saybrook is a center of the humanistic psychology movement as the ITP is in transpersonal psychology. The American Conservatory Theater operates one of the best theater schools in the west. The American Film Institute's conservatory is currently a candidate with WASC.

This is a kind of grass-roots academics that you don't find very many other places, and what makes it all possible is opportunity without elitism.