California Southern University

Since 2007 after the rebirth, California Southern University has never mentioned SCUPS. The SCUPS website, a separate website, did point to the then new CalSouthern website, but the CalSouthern website made no mention of SCUPS. That is because it is no longer SCUPS nor does it appear or function as SCUPS, it is California Southern University.

Due to this rather stupid marketing gimmick of claiming that they have been in existence since 1978, which is obviously propelled by California Southern University's (not SCUPS, SCUPS no longer exists) AMBITIOUSNESS (i.e. a university's age is often associated with stability and success) public opinion and former SCUPS graduates were able to poke a hole in the way they present themselves and somehow was able to compel them to include in their website the information that the university which began in 1978 was actually SCUPS, and that CalSouthern though completely new traces its history from SCUPS.

This case is no different from, say, the City University of New York (CUNY) tracing its history to the 1847 Free Academy. Clearly, there was no CUNY yet in 1847. It did not become CUNY until 1961. If I speak about CUNY and you reply speaking about the Free Academy, then there will be confusion. Likewise, when I say that California Southern University is a pretty ambitious organization, you should understand that I am referring to California Southern University and not involve the now non-existent SCUPS in your interpretation of what I said. The topic is California Southern University, and I am speaking about it accordingly. SCUPS is not California Southern University, SCUPS no longer exist. If you want to talk about SCUPS then fine. But be clear about it to avoid muddling the discussion.

 

I'm sorry, but that is clearly false. Today's California Southern website includes multiple references to SCUPS, both implicit and explicit. Check out their page on CalSouthern History :

The History page then goes on to discuss changes that occurred during the 1980s. All of that implicitly refers to SCUPS, right?

The History page then discusses changes that occurred during the 1990s. Again, all of that implicitly refers to SCUPS, right?

Finally, the History page reaches the present day, and the name change to California Southern. And the History page says:

If anyone is confused about the distinction between SCUPS and Cal Southern, it's because Cal Southern itself is making an effort to blur that distinction. When people want info on the school, they turn to the Web. And on the Web, Cal Southern is quite clearly presenting itself as the successor to SCUPS, not as a separate institution

If you want to talk about California Southern as a distinct institution, that's fine. But you are the one who needs to take responsibility for making that clear, because this is not the way that California Southern presents itself to the public.

 

Sorry, but you are an absolute idiot. I wasn't refferring to today's CalSouthern website in that particular paragraph you replied to. I was clearly talking about the past. Since they became CalSouthern in 2007, they have never mentioned SCUPS, until the time that they were compelled to do so by the public who were asking where were they in 1978, as well as SCUPS graduates who felt left out because of the name change. Here is that particular paragraph you replied to again:

After that, I said that they (CalSouthern) were later compelled to mention SCUPS in their website:

The point of all these is you are just trying to justify your asshole comment that California Southern University has not been "pretty ambitious" in the beginning, when in reality the not so ambitous organization you were referring to is SCUPS. California Southern University, the topic of this thread and a name that only existed in 2007, has always been "pretty ambitious." While they started out as SCUPS, they are no longer SCUPS. Don't you get that?

 

I don't see any problem with California Southern University mention its original root from SCUPS. Since most of the school nowadays do not retain the original name since the existent. So, why's matter? I think CalSouthern is making a good afford to strike for Regional accreditation.

 

@Tekman-- yeah, I'd forgotten about TUI.

@OpalMoon-- California is pretty stodgy about their educational institutions. The traditional B&M system is VERY well dug in here. Those colleges are a very vocal front politically, especially the state uni's. Anything that challenges the traditional status quo and methodology is fought, and fought hard. The state community colleges pitted their lobbyists against the opening of WGU California* and won, so far as I can tell. I'm surprised there hasn't been protesting at the accreditors' doorsteps about the opening of online-only schools.

Of course, there may have been complaints at the accreditors we haven't heard about (possibly a factor in the Ashford drama?).

*WGU California-- I've been saying for a while it would be a bad move to pursue this one quickly. If they wait until the state is in extremely (even more dire) financial straits, they should get a free pass.

 

One of the amazing things about the Internet is that it provides access to so much information. Another amazing thing is that people never actually use it to check their information before they start ranting.

California Southern's old web pages, like just about everyone else's, are stored in the Wayback Machine at Internet Archive: Digital Library of Free Books, Movies, Music & Wayback Machine. In the case of California Southern, the oldest web pages go back to 2007, which is when the new name was introduced. So what was Cal Southern saying in 2007?

(if you don't see this text in the link, scroll to the bottom of the page)

And Cal Southern used similar web pages in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. They are all nearly identical to today's 2012 page, although the words "paper and pencil" were deleted from the description of SCUPS in 2008 or 2009.

If you want to argue that the institution changed management and direction in 2007, then I'll accept that point. If you want to argue that California Southern is an entirely new institution with no historical connection to SCUPS, and that California Southern does not or did not acknowledge the SCUPS connection, then I'm skeptical.

 

Seems to me they've figured out they're going to have a hard time surviving in the current market without better accreditation. There are cheaper DL options, both in California and elsewhere. From what I can tell, it seems their quality of education has improved but they've had a difficult time marketing their programs-- again, in part because there was nothing to distinguish them.

Cal Southern had been trying to get into IACBE for a number of years, even going so far as to become a supporting member. I wonder if regional accreditation for them is primarily a stepping stone toward programmatic accreditation? Having the programmatic accreditation would give them an advantage over some of their competition, even though it would ultimately drive up tuition costs.

 

Perhaps. But as far as I can tell, IACBE doesn't explicitly require schools to be regionally accredited. The IACBE "Requirements for First-Time Accreditation" specify only that candidate schools must have "institutional accreditation from an appropriate nationally-recognized institutional accrediting organization." So in theory, it seems like Cal Southern or other DETC schools or other NA schools could qualify for IACBE accreditation without RA, although in practice, I don't know of any NA schools that have done this.

We know that NA schools can qualify as IACBE Educational Members, because Cal Southern has done so. And the IACBE "Requirements for Educational Membership" don't seem to be any different from the IACBE "Requirements for First-Time Accreditation", as far as institutional accreditation is concerned.

 

Sorry to bring this year old post up.... but there is also Fielding Graduate University which is a distance learning (online) institution, too.

 

Don't know what the mods will say, but I'm actually glad to see this thread resurface.

 

I hope California Southern University gains WASC accredited. It would be one of the few institutions in CA to offer an IO Doctorate at a reasonable price.

 

Of course, if the pattern holds, once they gain that accreditation their prices will skyrocket.

 

This is wrong. Fielding is not an "online" school. Nor can it be at all compared to Trident (formerly TUI); it's methodology is completely different. Trident is a traditional school stuffed into an online format. Fielding, on the other hand, is not.

In making distinctions about nontraditional schools, it is helpful to think of the process as having three stages: (1) determining learning outcomes, (2) the process for achieving them, and (3) the method for measuring learning. What you will learn, how you will learn it, and how it will be measured.

Next, one should look at who makes these determinations. In traditional higher education, the institution drives all three. They create curricular content, determine what learning methods will be employed, and decide on what measures (tests, papers, etc.) students have to pass in order to get credits and degrees. In nontraditional higher education, one, two, or even all three of these is determined by the student (in consult with the school and/or an advisor, with the school having the final say-so).

Trident is traditional in that, although it delivers instruction online (hardly nontraditional these days), it takes a typically pedagogical approach, teaching and dictating (1), (2), and (3) above. Additionally, there is no residency at Trident.

Fielding, on the other hand, is a community, where periodic residencies are a key learning component. Fielding dictates (1) (learning outcomes), but students determine with their advisors (2) (learning methods) and (3) demonstration of mastery.

The two schools could not be more different.

 

Yes. This has been true historically.

 

Wow! This is an old thread!

 

As someone who is soon going to choose a terminal degree program in psychology, is there anyone who has recent information concerning CalSouthern's PsyD program? I like what I see on their website.

Thanks.

-Al

 

Are you looking to become licensed? While most states do not require APA accreditation, many will require regional accreditation. Are you looking to only become licensed in California?

 

It's okay to necromance old threads.

 

Never mind what the mods say.

 

Thanks for responding, sanatone - I should have expressed my goals.

I am currently finishing up my masters and enjoy my day job - I work in the health and wellness center of a military base providing education, training, and consult on fitness and nutrition primarily, but also in other aspects of H&W: stress management, tobacco cessation, etc.

I am choosing to study for a terminal degree for many reasons, the greatest of which is to understand the psychological aspects of the individual and group consults that I deal with. I want to be able to offer the complete package of health: fitness, nutrition, and mental health (included in this last element would be stress management, substance abuse, behavior mod, etc.) So, I understand that for this sole reason, CSU would satisfy my needs.

But I would also like the opportunity to teach at the college or university level - I have been teaching adults for many years now, but not in the traditional academic setting. For me, this would be a part-time, preferably online position that I could passionately engage in for "side work".

I would also like the choice to pursue a clinical position or private practice as my goals modify moving forward. I'm not located in California, but licensure is something that should be available to me, even if I need further coursework.

I like CSU's idea of affordable education, and notice that the possibility of regional accreditation in the institution's future. I wonder if their future RA would also include former students.

Thanks for reading and responding.

-Al