From genuine to la la land

To the relatively small but engaged group of people who follow these things, I think it would be interesting to gain insider-quality accounts of what the heck happened to Columbia Pacific University and Greenwich University.

At earlier stages in their respective histories, both schools appeared to be sincere, legitimate attempts to deliver quality, flexible distance learning degree programs. They were open about their lack of regional accreditation. The credentials of their founders and top administrators were very strong.

And then they went off the deep end. . . .

Columbia Pacific's demise seems bizarre from my distant perspective. At one time, CPU president Richard Crews had the ear of the California legislature on fashioning authorization and approval standards for non-trad. schools. Now he's affiliated with a new alternative school project that -- and forgive me if I sound unfairly flip -- smacks of having something to do with intergalactic travel/consciousness.

Greenwich seemed like a very solid, albeit non-RA institution that offered a variety of innovative & interesting degree programs. But this whole Norfolk Islands thing is truly loopy and, in my mind, completely undercuts the credibility the school had developed.

Might those of you "in the know" have any insights on this?


------------------
David Yamada, [email protected]

 

Columbia Pacific was Les Carr's school all the way, so what Dick Crews did, does or will do doesn't have too much of bearing. The short version is the school kind of lost its way, especially in terms of quality control. When the players in government changed, CPU became more of an eyesore than a source of leadership in nontraditional higher education, so California got rid of them. The school made a lot of money for both owners over the years, whether it was operating well or poorly. And that was probably the intent all along. (Not that making money doing what you like to do is a bad thing.)

Rich Douglas

 

David, both the Columbia Pacific and the Greenwich situations have been discussed a great deal here, and last year in the other group, alt.education.distance (whose archives are now being redeveloped by Google, and are available from last August onward). Also in the 14th ed. of Bears' Guide.

Les Carr, owner of Columbia Pacific, has stated emphatically (and recently) that he will get regional (Northwest Association) accreditation for the school. This would be easier to sneer at if he hadn't made the same statement three times before (at Salve Regina, Lewis U, and New College of California) and brought it off each time.

We shall see.

It's good to see you back, and to learn that the pleasant lunch we had in Boston a few years ago wasn't the reason for your long absence from this arena.

John Bear

 

John (and others), sorry for beating an apparently dead horse! I'm a little fascinated by the bizarreness of the CPU situation in particular. Its story seems to me worthy of a New Yorker-style article!

 

I think that one element of both Greenwich and CPU's "going off the deep end" is that apparently neither school developed a healthy and robust institutional identity separate from the personalities of their founders/owners.

If you look at the "weird" schools, it is often hard to figure out where the school ends and the owner begins. I once asked Dr. Bear on AED about why Greenwich didn't relocate to the territory of the North Central Association and seek regional accreditation. As I remember it, his reply was something to the effect that Mr. Walsh liked living in Hawaii. But apparently the gentleman owns a home on Norfolk Island, so the school had no problem at all in relocating there.

Virtually all of the questionable schools have this pattern of stunted institutional development. But legitimate schools normally have institutional identities that are much larger than any one person. No one individual, no matter how quirky, is going to claim that Harvard University or the University of California is accredited by the Reptoid space aliens.

But when you get schools dominated by individuals, and when their personal interests differ from the best interests of the institution, you start seeing weird adventures in accreditation and appalling lapses of judgement in marketing.

 

Being quite shocked by the whole CPU thing myself (I was a serious student there, so imagine the shock I felt from the fallout), I began an active and in-depth investigation into the whole matter in 1996.

I have followed the changing state laws, the refusal by the governor to reapprove CPPVE (that's why it shut down in 1997), the court wins and failures, and more. I have recently acquired the CA approval documents from Dr. Les Carr (going back to 1982). I'm telling ya, the changing California regulations as per these documents really do make California look like la-la-land, the land of bureaucratic (and possibly corrupt) flakes and shakes.

In the not-to-distant future I will put up a new web-site where these approval documents will be displayed in full. I've yet to see this kind of government waffling and flip flopping anywhere. While I still have doubts about CPU and its "leadership" one thing I can tell you for certain; Les Carr has consistently responded quickly and has answered all emails and questions I and a group of alumni activists (mostly concerned PhD's that teach in traditional universities) have directed to him (over the past year). On the other hand, a letter to the CA governor signed by 14 alumni was directed to the DCA where not one of many questions were directly addressed. I will post all of this also on the new web-site.

Why am I doing this?? Because "the truth is out there" - Molder of television's X-files. Meanwhile I'm getting ready to apply to UK for either another MS (org psych - U of London) or a research doctorate somewhere else (definitely not Greenwich). Fortunately I have academic connections in the UK that are quite familiar with my work and will help my case. I agree, though, it is somewhat like beating a dad horse.

Cheers,
Earon

NB: Some of my academic work with CPU (including 66% of my 400 page masters thesis) is displayed online at http://home.portal.ca/~EaronKavanagh

 

David asked for some insights/info re: CPU and Greenwich. I can give some gossip re: CPU that might prove insightful.

Recently I had a long conversation with someone who was on the periphery of CPU's "leadership", the three wise men that started the CPU ball rolling (I can't help but sometimes call them "the three amigos". When I think of these three I also sometimes think of Don Quixote chasing at windmills. In the CPU case, the windmills, rather than big bad monsters, were a very interesting vision which these three were pursuing, pushed on by the backwinds of the humanistic and liberal education movement.

The package appeared golden and backed up further by top-drawer credentials and experience, - two of the 3 amigos previously headed up regionally accredited universities. And Les Carr had taken 2-3 institutions to regional accreditation. Who would not have been convinced of the credibility such credentials and experience would bring to CPU and to adult nontraditional education?

According to my source, one of the three amigos did not want to see CPU accredited and resisted such a move. This person held certain key controls and influence that anyone knowledgeable in business practice could understand. At that time the accreditor WASC would not (and still does not) accredit non-residential programs or institutions. Additionally, according to state regulations, a school had to have full approval to attain accreditation with WASC (which wasn't available anyway). This was an ongoing problem which Crews seemed to be attempting to navigate. IN the early 1990's things looked positive; federal laws looked like they would change to accomodate CPU's model (John Bear has reported briefly on these possible changes - I believe in the 12th edition).

My source tells me that the individual mentioned above consistently kept the two other amigos apart, at a distance from each other. Was this a highly functioning team? According to my source, no. For what it's worth two of the three amigos are no longer involved with CPU. And my source tells me that if any of them should reappear he will be out of the CPU pond in a flash. Les Carr is the only remaining amigo at CPU. He appears to have put together a new leadership group and I guess we'll see what happens.

I was told by Les Carr that the Indian accreditation (the beginning of the leap of the deep end of credibility) was solely connected to developing specific programs geared to the Indian community and tied in to the federal Indian Education Act signed by Clinton in 1996. When I told Les that Dr. Crews had written up the Indian accreditation on CPU's website as if it was a major achievement, and that from an optics perspective it was sheer lunacy and made CPU look like the flakiest outfit since the three stooges, Les simply agreed, stating that he understood fully what I was stating. I could never understand how these guys could risk their reputations by the Indian accreditation thing, but I'm not so sure they were working together.

My understanding is that the CPU corporation in California continues to exist and has taken its appeal (re: fight with the state) to federal court. CPU also incorporated as a different corporation in Montana (I guess it is called CPU of Montana). Naturally, my own fingers are crossed as I move onward. But I am supportive of the many decent and hardworking alumni I have met at CPU, and as I keep up my investigation the matter keeps getting to look like an episode of television's X-Files.
Cheers,
Earon