Please give me advice

Oh... yeah... that is the subject, isn't it? I'd forgotten. Thanks.

And the answer, Eric, is.... ? [Waits with bated breath...]

 

DesElms:

I’m not sure a sword was drawn, but possibly a nit was picked.

As to the difference between valid and soundness, that’s a silly retort as valid and sound are synonyms, along with convincing. I’ll use that word, claiming that the great unwashed masses that are naïve on a subject mean one thing over another is not a convincing argument.

I’ll take your comment about me just completing some class as the basis for my comments as an attempted joke. I don’t really get it, but perhaps because it is directed at me. The ability to make fun of ones self is a lofty pursuit.

Finally, and I probably wasn’t clear in my earlier post, I’m not attempting to debunk your argument in total, or argue some apparent equality of RA and NA degrees, as I don’t believe they are equal. I’ll caveat that by saying that I am still trying to understand the breadth of the inequality.

What I was attempting to point out is that unfounded rhetoric sandwiched between valid points IS STILL unfounded rhetoric. The danger is that it may make an argument seem stronger than it really is….

 

Greg,

I'm not trying to paint you as the snob or do I consider you to be the enemy. I hear your argument loud and clear. And you're correct on all of your points (I enjoy this bantering back and forth. It stimulates the mind).

As I've said, I have plenty of choices to pursue my Ph.D at a regional school and I may do so someday. I may also pursue a Ph.D at a national school when they offer it in the near future. For those schools that will not accept my national degree, I won't attend nor would I want to attend.

I looked at pursuing my degree at a national school or this reason. I don't think the issue is RA vs NA, it's really about pursuing your college education online. There are those skeptics that believe getting your educaiton online is not the same as attending class.

I was enrolled and was about to start the University of North Alabama's online MBA program. They sold themselves on the fact that they were RA and have been around since the mid 1800s. But, with their $900.00 per course tuition rate (not including books and other online fees), I decided to continue my education with CSU, which was more cost effective.

My course of action is defend online education, whether it be regionally or nationally accredited. And you're right, NA schools do get bashed on this fourm, but I will continue to defend them.

 

Read my dissertation. Or read about it on these very pages.

Employers don't, generally, have any idea what they're talking about when they mention accreditation. That's why unrecognized forms of accreditation (including made-up ones) are sported by degree mills.

Listen to the students who enroll in schools with fake accreditation (or who tout state licensure to be something more than it really is). They find out the truth and then wail. But it was a general ignorance of accreditation that got them into it in the first place. (Anyone who's read the Kennedy-Western forum has witnessed this.)

No, there's plenty of evidence regarding ignorance of accreditation.

I think this affects DETC and other national accreditors both positively and negatively. Positively, because it (NA) provides a simple answer ("yes") to the question, "Is it accredited"? Negatively, because some closed minds aren't ready to accept something (like DETC) with which they are not really familiar.

 

Validity and soundness are not synonymous. Though one is not a subset of the other, it is far easier for a thing to be valid than it is for that same thing to also be sound. One may make a valid point, but closer inspection may show said point to be a nevertheless unsound one.

Then you will be seen as one of said naive and unwashed.

[Just screwin' around... er... well... you know... sort of.]

No comment.

They're not... at least not in a whole bunch of almost strictly technical ways that, nevertheless, don't really matter enough in the larger scheme of things to consider the two substantially different for general employment purposes; and probably not even for alot (but still not most) transfer purposes. But for employment-at-a-regionally-accredited-institution purposes there may actually be some not-completely-insigificant differences... or even some downright significant ones, depending on how one looks at it. Whether they rise to the level of making the NA degree substandard in any real or meaningful way is debatable.

In what ways, I'm curious, do you see them as unequal?

Rich Douglas could probably speak to that here. He's quite the expert.

So, then, you're making a form, and not a content, analysis... is that it? And, in any case, what, precisely, was the unfounded, sandwiched, rhetorical part?

 

If it felt at any point like I made too big of a deal of it, then my error, too.

 

Really? It mostly just gives me heartburn.

That'll show 'em!

You make it sound like RA institutions don't offer good online programs. That's just not true. Nationally-accredited institutions don't have the market cornered on the online flavor of distance learning... not by a longshot. DETC specializes in it; and it's nationally accredited. Ergo, the appearance may be given that that's where one would find all the good online distance learning programs. But there are many, many RA online DL programs. The only thing is: With the exception of places like the regionally-accredited LSU (approximately only $70 per credit hour), RA coursework, generally, is alot more expensive than NA coursework. That said, I know several NA institutions that charge RA-like prices, too.

That's a completely different matter; and you should probably not be defending NA just so you can defend -- or thinking that you're defending -- the specifically "online" (or even the generally "distance learning," if that's your broader issue) delivery method. Both NA and RA schools offer distance learning; and within that subset, both offer both traditional correspondence, as well as online, delivery. Distance learning delivery methods, generally, are often wrongly associated with diploma/degree mills by an ignorant public -- and even many employer HR personnel, and sometimes even college admissions personnel. While it's true that the distance learning modality is the delivery method of choice for the diploma/degree mills, a distance learning course or program should not be suspect just because it's delivered via a distance learning method. But the RA versus NA debate doesn't really speak to any of that.

Yes... the fact that NA is often less expensive is a point already well made.

I see. Well, your earlier post seemed to suggest that it was an NA versus RA sort of thing.

Hopefully not because your real and underlying intention is to defend the online distance learning delivery method... 'cause whether the institution is RA or NA has nothin' to do with that.

 

WoW!

I didnt mean to start any kind of disagreement with my question and I apologize to everyone. I came home from work today and saw 26 total replies to my my question and thought "cool".
I certainly am glad I had a few IPAs (beers) before I read this
All joking aside and all disagrements aside, I have yet to choose a school. I appreciate all the input I received here! Everyone of you have made me think and do more research.

I was looking closely at Strayer University but a person posted above to consider not going to Strayer.
Again, I want a school that won't be scoffed at by a future employer because the degree I earned was done via the internet.

One thing I am getting is alot of phone calls. Admission Reps from Strayer, Walden University of Maryland University City and others have returned my call. Pardon my language but I feel a bit pissed and like I am being telemarketed by these representatives. It is like they are trying to sell me the school. I want to make a decision on a school that offers a great program for a bachelors degree in business. I am extremely interested in international business, am single and dont have a problem moving even if it is an international move to another country, Actually, I would love the cultural exchange!

So, any recommedations are appreciated.
Again, I thank EVERYINE for their input and concerns. If any of you get up my way in the future diner and a beer or two is on me!

Eric

 

Rich-

Where is your dissertation published? I would love to read it. I have learned so much about accreditation since joining this forum.

Thanks!

 

They are.

 

Some other places to look:

Fort Hays State University ($122 / sem hr)
Baker College ($170 / qtr hr)
Amberton University ($200 / sem hr)

 

This is what makes this board so fun, people can pretend that because they say something it is true!

(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=validity) Synonyms: valid, sound, cogent, convincing

Well that was fun, and easy too!

Then I now understand why you feel so very comfortable telling me what I mean! I don’t buy the premise that you can categorize me and then dismiss my comments based upon what you think I think or know. Wow man, that’s lofty of you!!

Through reading his board and other independent research, I am putting together my assumptions around DETC degrees, since I have an MBA from a school accredited by the DETC. My current list of assumptions are:


1. DETC and the colleges it accredits are 100% legit.


2. In academia land one would expect, for a single 3 credit class that the evaluating RA institute would under normal practice accept transfer credit that 20% of the RA schools would accept DETC on its face, 20% would be open to the evaluation, and a final 20% would not consider the credit for transfer at all. (Based upon input from R. Douglas)


3. There has been no research to understand if academia land acceptance is growing or not.


4. In worker day land a degree from a school with DETC accreditation is generally serviceable, but depending on the specialization or individual firm, it may or may not be useful as a credential.


5. There has been no research to understand if worker day land acceptance is growing or not.


6. DETC accredited degrees are professional degrees, not academic degrees, therefore they suck as a teaching credential. (I am currently involved in a research project that is quantifying the term ‘suck’).


7. Aside from the degree as a credential; the education you get is more dependent on the school and effort than the accrediting institute (RA vs. NA), both offer good, and bad, educations.

I’ll stand by my critique of any argument based upon deficient knowledge of what other people are thinking. We don’t know anything about these inexplicable ‘naive’ other people, and arguing that they mean one thing over another is bad FORM, poisoning any CONTENT based upon it!!

 

Eric, what state are you a resident of? It's possible (but not certain) that there's at least one public university in your state that 1) has an online program 2) has reduced tuition for in-state residents. If that's the case, it might be the best of both worlds.

 

QVAtlanta,

I am in Pennsylvania. You bring up a great point. I will look into state colleges that offer the flexibility of on line education.

Eric

 

You're actually not in the best geographic area for cheap tuition rates, but here's a good link:

www.pavcc.org

That's a consortium of PA community colleges offering online degrees. If you live in the right county they're as cheap as $60 a credit ($180 a class). Of course they don't have four-year degrees, but with the amount you save on lower division classes at the AA level you could affordably transfer to a much more expensive university for the full BA/BS.

 

Oy.

Or, as is true in this particular case, tedious and wearing. It was, after all, you who confessed to the picking of nits...

...and, it would now appear, for the worst possible reason of all to ever do so: Its own sake.

And, from my perspective, in this particular case, there's the added benefit of being able to witness how deftly you are exposing your own ignorance... as well as, perhaps, a mild, psychologically anomalous personality characteristic.

Not so fast -- or so flip -- there, Grasshopper. You need to start hanging around with a better class of dictionary... and/or thesaurus. Please click on any of:

• Valid, validity
  
  Sound, soundness

and note, as well, that neither soundness or validity (or any derivatives thereof) are included in one another's definitions, or are comingled in the definitions of other words which incorporate either soundness or validity (or derivatives thereof) in their definitions.

You betray your not having ever taken a freshman level "Introduction to Philosophy" course ... or, if you have, you either didn't do well in it, or you don't remember what you learned from it. In either case, you're revealing both your ignorance of the subject; as well as your refusal to even consider the possibility of said ignorance, in any case... which also makes you obstinate; and which is, I would guess, the very same mild personality flaw that makes you refuse to acknowledge either the validity or usefulness of generalizations. But I digress.

Validity pertains to logical possibility. Soundness presumes logical possibility; and adds the requirement of inherent correctness, accuracy and/or truth.

VALIDITY: An argument is valid if its structure conforms to the rules of formal logic and, therefore, logically follows from its assumptions.

SOUNDNESS: An argument is sound if it conforms to rules of logic and follows from its assumptions and it is also fundamentally true.

From here we could move to deductive invalidity and syllogistic reasoning... but then I'd have to charge you tuition.

Check... and mate. You didn't really think you were going to win this one, did you?

When was I ever talking about you, personally, when I made categorical statements about people, in general, who use the word accreditation and, by that, who actually mean regional accreditation... not because they prefer regional accreditation, but because of its ubiquity as well as the likelihood that they didn't know there was any other kind?

When a person is either unable or unwilling to grasp the concept of making generalizations about a given population based on what the vast majority of them would or have been observed to do or say about a given thing; and, further, when said person insists that such generalizations could not possibly have any validity because, after all, they are part of said population, and they most certainly don't feel that way... then perhaps some discussion of said person's ability to appropriately socialize might be in order.

We should probably define "legit." And this argument isn't about DETC, it's about national versus regional accreditation. DETC is but one national accreditor. Still, I agree. Continuing...

Leaving 40% unaccounted for, but let's continue...

Agreed, as Rich and John Bear have several times correctly pointed-out. That said, someone posted here just last week, I believe, his thusfar purely anecdotal (and admittedly unfinished) survey results which seemed to suggest that little or nothing has changed; and that, in fact, the odds of NA acceptability to RA institutions might even be worse than Rich's study originally found. But, yes, I'd say you are correct. Continuing...

You mean national accreditation, not just DETC. Regardless, I would agree. Most employers who even bothered to check the credential would find the institution listed in a book of those accredited by USDE/CHEA-approved agencies, and would be satisfied with that. Some others might look in a book containing only regionally-accredited institutions and would, therefore, not find the NA institution listed... which would be problematic for the NA degree holder. Still others who actually do understand the differences and who intentionally prefer and require that the degree be from an RA institution would also become something of an impediment for the NA degree holder. It's probably fair to say, however, that most employers either wouldn't check at all or, if they did, would find the NA degree acceptable because it's accredited by a USDE/CHEA-approved agency, and that would be that. So your assumption, I would say, is correct.

Agreed.

DETC-accredited degrees are most certainly not all professional degrees. That part of your assumption is just wrong. And, anyway, the issue is national accreditation, not merely the national accreditor, DETC. That said, it is true that NA degrees don't do well as teaching credentials.

Agreed. Accreditation ensures a certain minimum quality. Beyond that, the school, and the student, and the effort they both exert, is what matters most.

So, where's your conclusion? I mean, certain inescapable differences between NA and RA are plain to see, but for a person whose original challenge to me, herein, contained language which suggested a sophisticated appreciation for the art of argument, this failure to sum-up and state how RA and NA are different has been a real disappointment. Even when you first ran this list up the flagpole to see if anyone saluted in this post, you characterized the above as, and I quote, "a list of assumptions to help me frame up the ... [NA versus] RA thingy." Fine. So frame-up said "thingy," already!

Then by your reasoning, a poll, for example, of nearly unanimous thousands would be rendered invalid by the dissent of one... is that about it? If so, then see my above, herein, regarding the inability of one to generalize; and what one's marginal propensity for personalizing to the extent of being unable to acknowledge the validity of general statements about society, as a whole, notwithstanding one's own opinion, probably suggests about one's socialization, generally.

It's interesting that you cite Rich Douglas to make your point, above; but you ignore his post, in this very thread, which thwarts it... suggesting that it is my chest upon which you wish (thus far unsuccessfully) to place your knee...

...and seemingly just for the sport of it, to boot.

[sigh]

So how much longer do you want to keep this up? I grow weary sparring with the essentially unarmed.

 

What is worker day land?

 

I paused at that, too, when she first posted it in the other thread. At first I thought it might be that store in the mall -- next to Lego Land -- but then I figured it out.



But, seriously -- and I'm sure you realize this, but just for the reader's sake -- she means the private employment sector. Heaven forbid she use that term, however. Wouldn't want to make oneself too clear, after all. Ambiguity has its virtues, I suppose.

 

ADDENDUM

Well... and government employment, too, I suppose. But, in any case, she meant employment other than as faculty at an RA institution.

Oh... but wait a minute! I have deficient knowledge (boy, she really sent us to the dictionary with that one, didn't she) of what she's thinkng; so I can't know precisely what she means!

My bad. Sorry.



[Thankgod I didn't sandwich it between anything, too... or I'd really be in trouble!]

 

The workaday world of the workers. Not to be confused with 'wankaday.'