Weasel Wording

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Mac Juli, Oct 12, 2020.

Loading...
  1. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I wondered this, too. I wasn't aware of any. Nor am I aware of any programmatic accreditors that will forego institutional accreditation, and the vast majority of them expect RA, not NA.
     
  2. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    Ashworth and Aspen have CCNE accreditation for their nursing programs.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  3. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Right. Figured it was probably nursing. Thanks for indicating the schools.
     
  4. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    Oh, also, Grantham has ABET for their engineering tech degree.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  5. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    You're right, of course. But allow me to clarify my earlier position...

    I know that you can use the CHEA search to check if a school is accredited. But part of the problem is that "accredited" and "approved" and "registered" are, in many quarters of the world, functionally the same things. A nurse, for example, is registered or licensed (depending upon if they are an LPN/LVN or RN). They can also be "accredited" by agencies that accredit nurses for...nursing stuff.

    To the average person, is it better or worse to be accredited, approved, licensed, registered etc? National versus Regional. Two different accreditors for Orthodox Jewish institutions. Three for Christian schools. Some vaguely approving all manner of "career" schools. There's just a ton of nuance to the whole thing and really, all in the name of "is it legitimate?"

    It just feels to me like there should be an easier way to address the issue.
     
  6. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Yes. The Congress could pass a law putting some agency, even the Department of Education, in charge of deciding what is and is not a degree-granting institution.
     
  7. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    I mean, they kind of did, it's just that DOE delegates that function to accreditors. Though, you're also right. DOE isn't saying "this is a legitimate degree granting school." They're just saying "this school is eligible for federal financial aid."

    Personally, I'd like to see the states take this on and treat it like licensing. Establish reciprocal agreements with other states for credit transfer and admission. Could this limit where a student goes? Yes, yes it could. If you graduate from a school in Alaska then you might not be able to apply to a school in Florida with the ease you can today relying on accreditation. That would be all the more reason for a state like Alaska to establish as many reciprocal agreements as it could. It would also force a cultural shift whereby we dispel the notion that you're entitled to go to school wherever you want whenever you want as you "follow your passion."

    My wife, as you may know from my previous rantings, is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor. She cannot just pick up and show up in Hawaii and assume she will be licensed. She, in fact, had to repeat her clinical supervision AND take additional coursework when we moved from Pennsylvania to New York just to get the same license she had a mere 30 minute drive south from our new home. Yet, we feel it is somehow imperative for an undergrad to be able to transfer half of their degree around the country?

    It may be a controversial statement on my part but I think too many people exercise that current privilege to their own detriment. Maybe a little less centering it around the wants of the student would be good for everyone (though I do like the idea of TESU and how it gathers up all of those credits and kind of wish every state had a very similar model).
     
  8. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Accreditation in the U.S. isn't broken, and it doesn't need you guys to fix it. It's costless and trivially easy to determine whether a school is accredited, everything beyond that is just planning for its own sake. And no, maximal credit transfer opportunity is not a bad thing, especially now when more Americans than ever have some credit but no degree.

    I agree the issues with licensing could use a round of reciprocity agreements, but that's a problem with government, not with higher education. And this sort of thing can get solved at the state level, e.g., NC-SARA.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  9. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    It isn't? What about ACICS?
     
  10. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    And there's the continuing RA/NA thing. I don't mean the silly debate(?) we're tired of getting into here. I mean the real problems. Calling all accreditors "National" resolves nothing. It's still a two-tier system, with the attendant problem that some employers will continue to shut out non-Big 6 grads. Still many restrictions on non-Big 6 degrees qualifying the grad for further study at RA schools. NA/RA? I think the NRA could fix it, perhaps. Yeah - I think it does need to be fixed.

    Glad it's not my problem.
     
  11. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Agreed.
     
  12. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    It's an outlier. Yes, it was a real problem, but it is not representative of higher education accreditation as a whole. And I'm someone who finds non-RA institutional accreditation of degree-granting institutions unnecessary.
     
  13. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Yup.
     
  14. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    It still is. I see its resuscitation and continued existence is very problematic - even though it has no effect on me. And before the fall, it accredited around 900 schools. That's a significant slice of the pie. "Not representative?" What single recognized US accreditor has accredited more?

    Agree - there should be one type of accreditation for all. But in the present climate, RA isn't financially feasible for a lot of worthwhile schools. And nobody's talking about reducing the cost of accreditation.
     
  15. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    PS - What single US recognized accreditor has accredited more schools (Than ACICS, that had 900 before the fall)? I doubt there's any. I just perused the WASC list - it's around 200 degree-granting schools.

    Probably, the ACICS number, 900 is not that much smaller than all Accreditors-formerly-known-as Regional, combined. My point. ACICS' portfolio before the fall was far too large to be dismissed as an "outlier." Its portfolio would have added up those of several RA or NA agencies . It was a fallen giant. Too big a slice to dismiss.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2020
  16. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Agreed. A political move, certainly, that occurred after a change in administrations.
    HLC, which appears to accredit more than 1,000 tertiary schools. (Gotta consider non-degree-granting schools; ACICS accredits them, too). If you consider high schools, you probably push it beyond 10,000.
     
  17. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    It's not just the cost FOR accreditation, which most schools can sustain. It is, instead, the financial requirements OF accreditation. Regional accreditors set the bar very high for schools regarding their financial resources. These requirements are considerably lesser at DEAC and ACICS.
     
  18. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Well, remember two things. First, there are seven regional accreditors, not six, because WASC only accredits four year schools. ACCJS accredits junior schools in the same region: https://accjc.org/find-an-institution/ So that's like a hundred-odd more. Second, WASC's region consists of only two states. Granted, one of those is California, but still.

    Anyway, to me the more interesting figure would be what the total student population of ACICS schools combined was compared with the total U.S. student population at all schools combined.
     
  19. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    @SteveFoerster @Rich Douglas

    You guys are right. No doubt about it. I guess I just don't like ACICS ... don't like 'em at all. There - I got to say it! Done, now. Thanks.
     
  20. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    When national accrediting bodies got into the game of accrediting degree-granting institutions, I was for it. That's because the regionals were hostile to innovative (especially DL) programs and schools. I felt like these agencies were giving these schools a pathway. And since I always cheer for the underdog, I was digging it.

    But now you have to ask, are their (the NAs') standards weaker? Or are the RAs still being closed and stubborn? Or, to nut it down to what's relevant to this board: are DEAC's standards lower than the RAs? Are the RAs' standards too high? Is there still discrimination against DL schools that keeps them from becoming regionally accredited? (I think people know where I stand on this.)
     

Share This Page