Heritage University

Sometimes yes, but very often no. State (and local) governments are usually under no obligation to recognize degrees from local non-accredited schools.

Graduates of unaccredited schools usually have to either find employers who know and like their school, or else they have to find employers who don't particularly care about where applicants' degrees came from. Sometimes an applicant can sell the degree by making a persuasive case for it.

 

Thanks again for your information. However, what is the purpose of the gov't of setting up a state approved university, if the gov't itself does not have obligation to recognize it? In UK, all local universities are accredited by the gov't.

 

Good question.

Actually, a VERY good question!

 

I guess it depends on which Heritage University you are talking about. Heritage University in Toppinish Washington on the Yakama Nation reservation is a regionally accredited university. Until 2005 it was known as Heritage College. It offers some distance course work and multiple off campus evening classes. It is a wonderful school with a very diverse student body. However if you are talking about some other Heritage University at some other address I cannot comment. I have had a couple of staff earn their master's degree in counseling from this schol in the past couple of years and they have done very well in their work as rehabilitation counselors.

 

Thank you Nosborne. I just want to know what the rationale behind to set up a university approved in a state that will not have any obligation to recognize it, like a mother who may not accept her born child.

 

That doesn't make much sense. Why not, rather than requiring a newly-DETC school to dump the docs altogether, simply grant DETC accreditation up to the master's level (as they did with UNISA, et al, in their pre-doctoral pilot project days) and allow them to retain the docs with new admissions suspended for two years and grant doctoral accreditation after two years?

 

I don't know. Maybe DETC WOULD allow such a thing but it seems pretty clear to me that no institution should start out offering a dissertation doctorate. SOME track record showing institutional competence would seem to be a good idea...

Really, I am a bit nervous about the whole idea of DETC doctorates. A credible research doctorate, even of a "professional" nature, is a big deal. If you take a look at our N.Mex. state University system, for instance, there are only three institutions that offer doctorates because the remaining schools haven't got the resources to support doctoral level research. And even in the case of our three research schools, their doctoral programs are strictly limited to areas where the school has a demonstrated expertise and can support research at a very high level. Even then, you pretty much have to identify a specific faculty member who is an expert in your particular subspecialty who is willing and able to supervise your work. A research institution is also in constant contact with other scholars in other schools worldwide where work is being done that will affect the course of ANY candidate's work.

Does anybody seriously think that any American DETC institution actually HAS these resources? Or that anybody at DETC even knows what they are letting themselves in for?

I am afraid that what will happen is that a handful of dedicated students will put a LOT of work into a doctoral dissertation or project and receive their degrees only to discover that the rest of the academic world will judge their efforts to be either valueless or ill-informed.

D/L doctorates in general don't bother me so much because a lot of the research and writing seems to require ACCESS to these resources but not constant contact.

 

The one being discussed in this thread is brand new, apparently less than 90 days old. (But it nevertheless is already offering doctoral degree programs, which the real Heritage doesn't.) The new one is located in suburban Los Angeles and apparently is being aimed at Koreans. At this point it isn't even CA-approved and is operating under an initial temporary approval.

I think that the lawyers at the already-established Heritage University in Washington might be interested in this new one. The BPPVE might ask them to choose a new name as well.

An insidious aspect is that if anyone goes to the USDofEd or CHEA online directories and does a name search for 'Heritage Univerity', presumably the existing one will come up showing regionally accredited. A Google search for 'Heritage University' would return results for the real school. An inquirer would have to be alert to avoid confusion.

 

You know kcfile, I'm curious about something.

The Heritage University you ask about is operating under a temporary initial approval, so it's probably brand new. (The temporary approvals are supposed to only be for 90 days, but I suspect they often go beyond that.)

And your use of English (which is pretty good) and lack of familiarity with the American education 'system' (nothing wrong with that) suggests that you don't live in the United States. (Korea?)

My question is how you first heard about this school. It's apparently less than three months old. Is it already advertising in your part of the world? If so, what kind of advertisements? What's it saying? How long has it been saying it?

There's something cryptic on its website mentioning a "Korean program". Does Heritage have agents or some kind of local "franchise" program operating where you are? If so, what are they doing?

 

What bothers me is that there doesn't even seem to be much visible preparation underway to gather the necessary resources. I don't see any DETC schools creating research units. I don't see them trying to build even a modest scholarly reputation in anything.

 

A most excellent post, that I completely agree with. It is a post deserving of a whole new thread, IMHO.

 

It's just that I get the feeling that many who post here are of the mistaken impression that a doctorate is, like, twenty classes and a big term paper beyond one's B.A. Worse, I get the awful feeling that DETC sees it the same way!

It isn't. Graduate education is a qualitatively different experience than undergrad work is. The process of qualifying new doctors is itself an important part of the country's research establishment. It isn't just "twenty more courses and a big paper".

 

Yes and those people that don't understand the significant qualitative difference are usually the ones that hold the bogus doctorates.

 

Re: Re: Heritage University

Hi, Bill.

I'm a Singaporean but required travelling over different places. I'm doing a research of global educational systems. This university's information is provided by one of my friends living in CA.

I'm quite interesting to know the rationale behind USA state gov'ts to set up educational institutes as compared with that of UK educational system. I myself prefer UK educational system that looks more simple and rigid than a mess system in USA.

 

Re: Re: Re: Heritage University

This is not quite true, or perhaps worded inaccurately. Any university set up by the government will likely be fully accredited in a relatively short time. Accreditation planning and preparation will start well before the first student is ever enrolled.

The point of your statement is very accurate, though. The legal jurisdictions within the USA are unusual in that most laws are at the state level and below. Regulation of private universities varies greatly from state to state. What this all boils down to is that your statement about it being a confusing mess is absolutely correct. It can be confusing to US citizens but especially confusing to outsiders looking in.

 

Re: Re: Re: Heritage University

The US system is indeed messy and confusing, with a general lack of government oversight relative to most other countries.

But note that the relative lack of regulation or standardization works both ways. Some US schools are shockingly bad by global standards. On the other hand, some US schools are stunningly good by global standards.

Consider the annual "Academic Ranking of World Universities" by the Institute of Higher Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University (see the 2004 list here). Since this list is compiled in China, there is no reason to suspect pro-American bias. Yet the top of the list is overwhelmingly dominated by US schools: 35 of the 50 top-ranked universities on this list are in the US.

Consider just the State of California, which has a particularly messy educational system, even by US standards. Yet California alone has 9 of the 50 top-ranked universities in the world. That's more than the UK (5), France (2) and Germany (1) put together.

A rigid, heavily-regulated educational system tends to produce standardized, uniform schools. That means fewer really bad schools (unlike the US), but it also means fewer really good schools (again, unlike the US).

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Heritage University

Thank you for all your information that will be valuable for my research.

I agreed many ranking at the world wide top universities that are from USA in private nature. However, there are thousands more that may be sub-standard and the number of universities in USA seem to be uncountable as compared with that in UK. If we use the top ranking universities as % of the total universities of a country, the result may be different totally.

Also, it is unreasonable why a state gov't does not impose some minimum requirements to set up a university that must be recognized academically at least in such state. All its programs are at least acceptable by the state gov't itself. Logically, if a university is approved by the state gov't, it must have obligation in legal and ethical sense to accept the graduates of the university!

 

Nope, no obligation

No, not necessarily. In the US, there are often very different standards for jobs within government (public sector) and outside government (private sector). The private sector, in general, has more freedom to hire whomever it pleases. The public sector, in general, has more rigid hiring rules and criteria. So a degree that may not meet public sector criteria may still be of some use in the private sector.

Some state governments apparently believe that the private sector is willing to accept substandard degrees. And so they allow substandard schools to sell substandard degrees to people seeking private sector work, despite the fact that these degrees do not meet public sector standards. This may or may not be a good idea, but it is not inherently illogical or unethical.

For example, it was noted (earlier in this thread) that some states allow unaccredited engineering programs, even though graduates of these programs are ineligible for engineering licenses within those same states. But you don't need an engineering license for most private-sector, non-civil engineering work. So while an unaccredited engineering degree may not meet public sector standards, it still may get you a private sector job, at least with some employers.

 

Thanks, folks!

This is a most excellent, vigorously informative, and stunningly delightful discussion (and thread)!

The postings herein, among many others, clearly put DegreeInfo (and its members, experts, contributors and visitors - but especially the ideas and how they are presented, discussed, and analyzed - in a class by itself!

And I mean, world class!

Carry on! (... and Thanks, again).