http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04771t.pdf It is the Government Accounting Office's report on Degree Mills. Some of the wording makes me wonder if the Excelsior's programs may be considered a Degree Mill. What's your take?
Alnico, which wording? Excelsior would not be considered a mill as it is accredited by a body recognized by the U.S. Dept of Education. But please clarify which wording and I may be able to answer more directly.
The title "Diploma Mills and Other Unaccreditited Schools" is one part that makes me wonder. This may be read to mean that some Diploma Mills are accredited. "We searched the Internet for nontraditional, unaccredited, postsecondary schools that offer degrees for a relatively low flat fee, promote the award of academic credits based on life experience, and do not require any classroom instruction." - While this does specify unaccredited schools, the focus was on life experience without classroom instruction --- as is the case for Excelsior college examinations and evaluation of professional certifications for college credit. "Other schools, commonly referred to as diploma mills, sell academic degrees based upon life experience or substandard or negligible academic work." "These schools each charge a flat fee for a degree." (Excelsior used to have a flat fee structure for the program at www.itdegree.com. These, combined with no listing say ya or nay, are the things that make me wonder -- will the degree I am working to be considered worth while --- or just another product of a Diploma Mill.
Excelsior is regionally accredited and recoginzed by the new york state departmnt, they are not a diploma mill. simply check www.chea.org
Alnico, An Excelsior degree is fine based upon accreditation. But lets examine the methodology. The government would not approve payment of exams unless it met the criteria established by the governing policy or law. See my post on the Homeland Security Act, and, a particular agency will have other stipulations. For example my agency will pay for classes directly related to my position but not for graduation fees or classes unrelated to my work that may be part of the degree process. i.e. Modern Poetry when I work in a technical field. Exams related to professional licensure or certifications may also be considered. But not paying for me to take unrelated exams and acceptance are different. Excelsior (assuming we are talking about the same Excelsior) credits are Regionally accredited and meet the government definition of acceptable. The same would be true of portfolio assessment if it lead to an accredited standing. But let me clarify one point. Transcripts are required. Each hiring/selecting official has their own perspective of educational achievement. I look for learning outcomes, others may want to see seat time, so be prepared for questions.
The title in context simply means that the report regards 1) Diploma Mills and 2) other unaccredited schools. This does not imply that some diploma mills are accredited or that all unaccredited schools can be classified as dimploma mills. It does imply that all diploma mills are "unaccredited" -- which is probably true. Particularly if we confine "accredited" to regional or national (DOE recognized) programs. By this logic then, one can say that the GAO has stated that "if a school is accredited -- it is NOT a diploma mill" RE: Excelsior -- isn't Excelsior a state run school?
Granting credit for life experience usually involves evaluating a portfolio explaining why you think you should get credit and for what. Examinations are not required. Granting credit by examination involves evaluating knowledge based on performance on a standardized examination. Example are CLEP, DANTES, etc. Most B&M colleges have provision for "testing out" of classes as well. "life experience" is not required -- you either pass or fail. Granting credit for professional certifications and credentials requires that those credentials have been evaluated previously by some organization of authority (such as ACE). The idea is that if I have an FAA pilots license, I should get credit for the academic portion of that licensing AND that FAA is in a better position to test my skills than Excelsior. Another method Excelsior uses is the award of credit based on evaluation of educational experiences in the Armed Forces. This is based on the recommendation of the ACE after evaluating those experiences. For example: someone who served as a clerk typist in the Navy for 6 years should not need to take typing classes in college. That ability has been proven already. In these ways -- Life Experience, Credit by Examination, Equivalent Credit for Certifications Held, Evaluation of Military Experience are each seperate and distinct models. While credit by examination implies a certain "life experience" -- it is not the same as awarding 4 hours in fish biology solely because you keep an aquarium (an actual example of life experience). Unless you can take and pass the CLEP General Biology for 8 hours of general biology credit (an actual example of Credit by Examination), or were a Medical Lab Specialist in the Army (as much as 54 hours in biomedical courses), or hold some professional certification evaluated by the ACE (there isn't one for fish keepers). What really surprises me about these discussions of whether credit by examination is a valid educational model is that every state university I have ever attended accepts some form of credit by examination. Very few have provisions for award of credit for "life experience" without some examination or validation.
I'm attending a state run B&M school in South Carolina that charges a "flat fee" for my participation in their educational process. They call it full-time tuition and they bill me for it twice each year. This year it amounts to just over $6000 -- I consider it a good investment. That means that from start-to-finish, they charge a flat-fee of $24,000 for a BA. I've never heard the University of South Carolina system referred to as a diploma mill because of this fee structure though. And they DID accept my CLEPS, military experience, and departmental exams (not as generously as Excelsior). They also encourage me to take some courses online. Sounds like every other RA DL school, except that this one has classes on campus too. Now, if they said "give us $6,000 and we'll give you a BA; and you don't even have to come to class or do anything but pay the bill..." that might make one think they were a diploma mill. That's what GAO is concerned about. They considered schools that say "If you've been a computer repairman for two years (life experience), and you pay us $300 (flat fee), we will give you an AAS degree. No further questions asked."
...and then there is the fact that California no longer recognizes Excelsior's nursing degree -- as credential valid for licensure. http://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53063
That link explains that California WILL accept Excelsior graduates. It specifies some additional requirements, but that is not uncommon at all when considering interstate licensing of nurses. California requires licensed teachers from other states to often meet additional requirements as well. Does that mean that California doesn't recognize the University of South Carolina or Clemson University because they may require additional requirements for certification? Let's not confuse our apples and oranges here.... California requires that: notice the comment -- like other out-of-state graduates It appears to me that you are trying to find reasons not to attend Excelsior. If you don't like the school - don't go there. Attend and graduate from a school whose philosophy you agree with.
Let see now... I made that post how long ago. Yes. Although I did not state so when I posted, I was attempting to decide if Excelsior's degree might be mistaken for a diploma mill by employeers (like the government). Since I am not a nurse, and have no desire to move to California...I could care less what California thinks. However, in the interest of others (who may be nursing candidates) considering the same concren -- I addressed the concern. Excelsior seems to think that it is concern enough that they have placed a warning on thier website too: <clipped from Excelsior's website> "Notice for California Nursing Students UPDATE: 12-05-03: The California Board of Registered Nursing (BRN) met December 5, 2003 to consider the recommendation of its Education/Licensing Committee to restrict the eligibility of Excelsior College graduates for licensure as RNs in that state. The BRN voted to accept the Committee’s recommendation which will affect all students enrolling in Excelsior College’s School of Nursing on or after December 6, 2003. In light of the decision of the California BRN and until or unless the decision is reversed, the College (1) will not encourage persons seeking to practice as RNs in California to enroll in our ADN program and (2) will not recommend that they take Nursing Concepts 1 & 2, either as practice tests or for credit. NLNAC- Accredited Notwithstanding this recommendation by the Education/Licensing Committee, our degree programs in nursing are widely recognized for their rigor and quality. Our associate, bachelor's, and master's degree programs are accredited by the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (NLNAC), with our associate and bachelor's programs having been continuously accredited since 1975 and 1979, respectively. It is important to note that Excelsior College nursing graduates pass the NCLEX at a rate equal to or greater than the average of nursing schools nationwide."
almost exactly 30 days -- I generally don't consider 30 days to be that very long. 30 months - yes; 30 years - certainly. That aside -- how does the situation in California with regard to nurses trained at Excelsior (and "other out-of-state" schools) apply to this report from the GAO? To me you seem to imply that because California has a higher standard of training for nurses than most other states (same applies to teachers) that you think this makes Excelsior appear to be a diploma mill in keeping with the GAO report. I don't follow. Excelsior puts that notice up because it is an issue for concern to people who want to be licensed in California. University of South Carolina has a similar notice about teacher certification in their catalog -- that doesn't make USC a diploma mill or sub-standard. You wrote in a message above: which is not true and is not supported by the facts. California DOES recognize Excelsior (and all other RA) degrees -- they simply require additional work (as they do of many other degrees) for nursing licensure. You imply, without merit, that Excelsior is somehow substandard in this regard. And yet, the line of your OP was whether Excelsior is a diploma mill based on the wording of the GAO report. The GAO report doesn't address the licensing of nurses in California. In fact, for federal government purposes -- in most cases, a nurse need only be licensed by ANY state regardless of where they are employed. It's unfortunate that the GAO report doesn't include a glossary of terms -- in an effort to clarify some of the methods used by schools like Exceslior, Thomas Edison, and Charter Oak. These methods are EXACTLY the same as those accepted by most B&M RA institutions throughout the country. Reality is that most univerities do award credit for credit by examination, online classes, and independent study -- what sets their programs apart from the big three is that they most often require 25% (30 hours of a BA/BS, 15 for an AS/AAS) of the coursework for the degree be done through their campus. It is sad but there are still many who have such little understand of modern post-secondary education practices that they don't understand that most universities have embraced many of the methods pioneered by the likes of Excelsior. Comments like "California doesn't accept..." ony reinforces those perceptions and damages the value of all legit DL programs. If I take online courses through LSU (a fairly well recognized university) and transfer them to Excelsior -- how has the level of education differed from transfering the same LSU course to UCLA? Fact is -- the Big Three don't fit the model of concern in the GAO report. Are they equal to a resident degree from Princeton, Harvard, Yale, MIT, UC (Berk.), or even Univ NC? NO! Are they equal to or better than a BA from East Podunk State == probably. Are they on a par with Almeda, Lexington, Kent, Hamilton, and others of concern to GAO -- absolutely not. apples and oranges. This though is just my opinion.
I think you are right, you are not getting my point. In addition, you are right -- my statement was not supported by fact. It was however, extrapolation based upon Excelsior's website's statem ent "In light of the decision of the California BRN and until or unless the decision is reversed, the College (1) will not encourage persons seeking to practice as RNs in California to enroll in our ADN program and (2) will not recommend that they take Nursing Concepts 1 & 2, either as practice tests or for credit. " Now, that you for setting the record straight that it is accepted -- if additional hoops are jumped through. I am fully aware that Excelsior is well accredited. The point of my original post was that employeers are not so aware an may easily mistake Excelsior for a degree mill since no clear definition is given in the document. That definition is available, but did not make the publicity that the GAO report made...and we know employeers are not typically going to do any real research. Hence my original statement, "will the degree I am working to be considered worth while --- or just another product of a Diploma Mill." Notice that I did no say it would be worthless, but rather, questioned how others would consider it. On other boards, I ask the same question about the name "Excelisor." When I ask employers if they have heard of Excelsior...the answer is "No." Until I ask them "have you heard of Regents College of NY?"...in then the lights come on...and they know what I am talking about. Again, the issue is not how accredited or worthy Excelsior is...I am a big fan...... it is just will others recognize that? I've resolved to ensure I put "formerly Regents of NY" or some other factual statement as part of the schools name on my resume to eliminate the strong likelyhood that it will be go unrecognized.
There then we get into that whole name recognition area (Excelsior was probably a poor name choice when Univ of the State of NY was being rec'vd well -IMHO) That said though -- does Excelsior enjoy the same recognition as other schools not exactly on the tip of all tongues? By this I mean; every employer has heard of MIT -- we don't even have to use their name, just the abbreviation. Almost everyone has heard of Notre Dame, Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Oxford, Cambridge, SUNY, UCLA, UMich, and a host of others. I have attended Coker College, Coastal Carolina University, and Stanly Community College among others -- are their name recognition any less than Excelsior among employers (outside their immediate area and expertise)? This relative obscurity doesn't make employers think that these are a diploma mill -- it may make them wonder about the quality of program. This then turns the discussion to the value of "the name game" and not the value of the program itself. Even the GAO study reports that the success of diploma mills is often the result of the naming of the mill. I've said for years that if the relative prestige of the issuing institution is important in a persons selection process -- that he is best off attending one of the well recognized traditional universities. But, part of what the GAO is reporting states that most reviewers have no idea what they're looking at when they consider applications and the degrees reported. That means that an absolutely outstanding degree from a well accredited university with a bad name may have less market value than an academically useless degree from a mill with a great sounding name. I believe though that it was Dr. Bear who has stated before that the government can solve this whole problem simply by regulating the use of the word accredited.
