Does accreditation matter?

I hope that I am not re-hashing or beating to death a tired topic, although I went through many of the threads to try and ensure that this has not already been touched upon.

What put the seed in my head was the long thread regarding European accreditation of schools. The school in question was one by the name of Swiss Management Center (SMC).

For whatever reason, that school stuck in my head and I took a look at their web-site and my interest has been peeked. I am waiting to hear back from them with some more specific information regarding my needs and their services. But I digress.....

My point or query is this: If SMC, for example, offers an educational solution (delivery method) and quality content (courses, materials, etc), is official recognition by the state really needed? Is not the educational experience and the individuals ability to transfer these experiences into professional results what is most important? When I apply for a job or seek a promotion or advancement, it is the quality of my character and my proven abilities that I would hope would be the deciding factor - not the dotted 'i's and crossed 't's or pedigree of my degree. Or, am I living in a dream world?

As a case in point, 6 Sigma is all the rage in business management right now. I am sure that there are plenty of colleges and universities that offer courses in this but, without a doubt, THE place to 'learn' 6 Sigma is at the 6 Sigma institute and - GUESS WHAT!- it is not accredited!!! However there is not an employer in the world that would quibble with someone having a certification or degree in 6 Sigma from them - it's reputation is based on it's delivery methods and its content, along with the quality of its students.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

P.S. Not to mention, as is evident in so many of the threads, accreditation seems to be more a function of politics than anything else.

 

It is a function of setting standards users of degrees such as other schools and employers can rely on.

Politics may be involved but standard setting is the goal.

I am sure others will educate you.

 

Accreditation is more of 'consumer protection' than politics. Granted, there are probably many good products out there in the market that are not certified, but how are we to tell in advance?

Education is not like my street corner restaurant where if I am dissatisfied with the service I will decide not to go there again. By the time one discovers that one has been taken for a ride by a diploma mill it is too late.

BTW, shouldn't this be in the 'Accredited vs State-Approved vs Unaccredited' forum?

Opherus

 

For Europe, you can certainly say:

Accreditation does NOT matter (very much).

State approval and official recognition of the federal ministry of education make a degree legal, accreditation ist just in it's infnacy.

Greets,
trigger

 

Besides, since every educational degree that is not state approved and evaluated in most cases is an illegal one, it is almost totally useless in business as well as in academics, no matter if the education itself might be good or not.

T.

 

Gosh!! You people are quick!

Let me see if I can answer some of the questions you posed to me first....

I understand what the goal of accreditation is, I am just questioning, given the speed and diversity in the market place, whether accreditation has relevance any more. Just because a degree, program or institution does not have 'accreditation' does that lessen the quality of its offering? And if one does buy into accreditation, then which accreditation is 'right'?

I started the thread here because my interest lies in distance learning programs - which for me means outside the US- and the need or applicability of accreditation. I would be an American earning a degree granted by a Swiss institution, Swiss Managment Center.

In terms of Triggers point, I do not understand what is meant by 'illegal' degree? How can a degree be 'legal'? Do you mean 'recognized/accredited'? Even so, that does not answer the question, would an employeer really care so long as I have the skill-set to get the job done? What does an 'accredited' degree mean?

If I have the option of earning a degree from an accredited institution that just meets the requirements for the accreditation OR from an institution that delivers very high quality content with a professor and support system that is cutting edge and allows me to more easily internalise what is being taught - does not the latter have more intrinsic value than the former, even if it is not accredited?

 

OK, I will take a shot at this question.

It depends on the employer, if you are going to try to teach, the requirements usually call out what type of University the degree must be in.

For example, in Business there are three types of accreditation in the US. National (AACSB), Regional (there are 6), and state. Some schools require the national accreditation, if you do not have it, you will not be considered.

Some require the regional accreditation, so if you go to a school with the state accreditation only, you will not meet the minimum requirements.

Each area has their accrediation agencies.

Some are illegal - let's say you pay $1,000 and "buy" a degree, no classes, no test, etc. From the University of X. Your employer would want to know that all you did was purchase a piece of paper. This starts the reasoning for accreditation.

Each level is a bit more strigent than the next, though the politics get pretty thick, and some of the standards don't make a great deal of sense.

But be very aware - in some cirlces, it is a VERY big deal.

 

If you enter an academic program, that is not accredited, with your eyes open, fine. If you expect everyone to be as thrilled with your degree as you are, don't.

To many people, there are 2 kinds of schools. These are accredited schools and degree mills. I do not believe this to be true but it is a common perception.

 

In the U.S. the best academic programs have US DOE recognized accreditation. If you want to transfer among these schools or have a license to practice a profession you generally have to show you've graduated against those standards. One can argue for this system on the basis of quality while others argue its a business protection philosophy and oligopolistic problem. An alternative is State Approved which works ok in certain circumstances; however it gets a little fuzzy with SA because some states aren't as rigorous as others about academic standards (e.g. California and New York have established quality control systems). As a consumer, these systems protect your investment and the perception of whether you have a legitimate degree. Even though accreditation is considered essential, it is still voluntary.

On the other hand, major corporations e.g. Microsoft, IBM, HP offer a tremendous amount of professional training through distance learning and certification programs, none of which are accredited nor is it required. The value of the learning in the marketplace is based on the reputation of the company and its product offering.

 

Kristie-

Thanks for you post, while it certainly addresses concerns should I want to stay in the US - I would really prefer more flexibility - hence my reason for looking at institutions/programs outside of the US. I want a degree that is recognized internationally, hence my reason for looking at distance learning (a more economical way to earn a degree from abroad).

Perhaps, recognition is what I should be using as the call word in place of accredited....... Again the 6 Sigma Academy is recognized as THE place to earn your 6 Sigma wings but is not accredited at all. It is the Academy's name recognition (brand recognition) that counts.

This is an extreme example but if Harvard decided to stop paying for its accreditation - do you really think that companies or governments are going to stop recognising degrees it grants? Will it stop attracting some of the top talent in the world?

Is it correct to think that accreditation organizations -
that were built within the box of brick and mortar institutions, by those brick and mortar institutions (almost all US based) - are responsive enough and open enough to give cyber built institutions the fair shake they deserve?

 

"Does anyone have any thoughts?"..........You may not have noticed that there is an entire forum on this site dedicated to this debate. You could spend the rest of your life reading the past posts on this subject.

 

Illegal is, at least in the cases of Germany and Austria for example, to be taken literally.

The use of a degree that is not state approved (EU title) or state approved + RA + professional accreditation (US title) is forbidden by law here and you commit a crime by using it.
(no kidding)

---

Talking about your question about the skills vs. the degree -> in Europe nobody would even hire you with a degree that has not the minimum standard of accreditation, employers look on your credentials very much.

greets,
t.

 

There is nothing like THE individual. We have diverse needs, visions, etc

Opherus

 

If Harvard was no longer accredited it would no longer qualify for federally backed student loans, a significant source of its revenue. Not to mention the potential loss of revenue and market share suffered at the hands of its competitors who would use that fact against them.

 

No. For the record, AACSB is a professional accreditation. It is not a national or institutional accreditation. Professional accreditations are accorded to programs in colleges that are already accredited (RA). National (NA) accreditations such as DETC and TRACS are institutional. RA (regional) is also institutional. In the United States, RA (or institutional accreditation) usually precedes professional accreditation. RA is the prerequisite for most (if not all) professional accreditations such as AACSB, AMA, ABET, ABA, etc. Professional accreditation like AACSB do not exist on its own. RA serves as its foundation.

 

First of all, I think that you vastly under estimate the power of such a brand and, secondly, Harvard's $18.1 billion endowment that has a 16.9% return over 5 years provides a substantial amount of its income........

 

I am going to throw my 2 cents in.................

I would say accreditation matters a lot!!!!!!!!

Especially in the educational employment field.

If you want to teach Elem, Middle, HS and College/University leve...........then YES!!!!!!!!!!!

I do not know what state laws withing the DOE say outside of Ohio & Florida about teaching and degree accreditiation, but they OH & FL are strict!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Yes, accreditation matters

In my previous post, I said no to Kristie's definition of national (NA) accreditation. Yes, accreditation matters and an unaccredited degree is a worthless piece of paper.

 

Harvard is RA

Harvard University is RA but is not accredited by AACSB. The Harvard Business School is accredited by AACSB.

 

A US problem?

I have been chastised on this board more than once for saying that “accreditation” primarily is a US problem. In the UK, institutions claiming to be universities that award degrees in the Uk have to have been awarded a Royal Charter to do so (issued by the UK government in the name of the Head of State, the Queen). No institution can describe itself as a university legally without a Royal Charter.

In the US the law is different, hence the fuss about “accreditation”. Those institutions that are accredited have to be so by one several Regional Authorities covering the territory they operate within. They have “RA” status. The US Department of Education requires RA status to make students in them eligible for Federal Loans and to recognise their degrees as “valid” for employment purposes. Mnat private employers follow this lead. Thus the debate in this thread and the separate one on this board about “accredited” and “non-accredited” programmes – and endless discussion that knows no limitations on the patience of others not in the USA.

In addition several informal agencies have emerged (AACSB in the US; AMBA and Equis in Europe) that “accredit” particular Schools and attest that their degrees conform to a standard (unresearched) pedagogy, though because of flaws in their pedagogy (which has been researched) they are not necessarily a guarantee of quality in post-academic employment. In effect, these unofficial, often competing, “accreditation” agencies are pure marketing devices to bestow plaudits of respectability on their subscribing members in a vast array of non-members that may be as respectable (tough exams regimes, for instance) as the members or of varying quality ranging from sub-standard to outrageously fraudulent. It pays the unofficial “accreditors” to lump the whole spectrum of non-members into one group and to disparage them even though one end of the spectrum is more rigorous academically than most of their members.

Some few do not need the unofficial “accreditation” (e.g., Harvard) but they pay their dues because US Federal agencies, overwhelmed with semi-fraudulent and outright crooked “universities” and their “degrees”, tackle their need to discriminate between the good and the awful by the easy route of believing the marketing hype of the unofficial “accreditors”. The situation becomes complicated because some of the awful have invented their own spurious “accreditation” agencies!

Wishing to avoid “colonial” charges of interfering in how the US regulates it educational system, I refrain from stating the obvious – make the designation of a university and recognition of degrees the subject of legal licence, as in the old mother country, and most – though by no means all, as John Bear no doubt will remind us – of the problem would disappear, if not overnight then certainly within a few years.

Back to the original question. Germany certainly goes overboard in its non-recognition of certain MBA degrees from other European Union members, including the UK. It designates certain of its citizens claiming to be MBAs that are not approved by its Lander as criminals, subject to fines and worse, though it is perfectly legal for a non-German citizen, from Italy, France or the UK, etc., to so designate themselves on their business cards if their MBA was earned outside Germany. Apparently, distance-learning self-study is not recognised yet in Germany! What chance the Swiss course mentioned has I do not know. Whether employers care is another matter. What you should ask is whether the course adds to your human capital – that is what an employer is hiring – at a price you are willing to pay.