The "best" of the unaccredited universities??

I believe during my, um, "discussions" with ACICS, they were going to pilot accrediting master's programs with three schools.

ACICS is almost irrelevant to this board because they don't tend to have DL programs, IIRC.

 

SCUPS

I had never seen the SCUPS webpage before this thread. I took a look and found that it was approved for VA benefits and salliemae loans.

I thought that VA benefits were only for accredited(RA or DETC or ACICS) schools. Also, I thought that a school had to be Title IV to have student loan availability.

I had heard on the board that SCUPS owns NCU. Is this correct? Should I be suspicious of NCU for this fact? Maybe I am missing something on SCUPS here.

As far as tuition goes, they are about $9K behind Touro and NCU. To me, not enough of a difference to make it worthwhile for the non-accredited factor. That $9K could be more costly down the road in my opinion.

 

Indeed it is!

 

Re: Re: The "best" of the unaccredited universities??

 

Re: SCUPS

That's not quite accurate. SCUPS does not "own" NCU. Both NCU and SCUPS are owned by Dr. Donald Hecht, who serves as President of NCU.

I saw the conection between the two and was suspicious at first also, but I later found that there was no malicious intent between either institution., and NCU is fully accredited.

SCUPS was up for DETC accreditation last year, and they removed their doctoral programs from being offered to accomodate DETC standards. The board apparantly had a falling out with Dr. Hecht, and they are now not seeking accreditation anymore, and are offering their doctoral programs again.

I think the big area of concern is SCUPS JD. Because CA will allow someone with a distance JD and that passes the bar exam to practice law, this would be a loss of money for SCUPS and Dr. Hecht. This is the reason why some people in NCU told me that SCUPS does not pursue WASC accreditation, because the JD will have to go away. Also, to get DETC accreditation, the DBA & PhD programs would also have to go away, costing SCUPS a lot of money. Since this is a business, and I'm sure Dr. Hecht is a business man, SCUPS continues to unacredited and viable for CA residents, but not for everyone else.

I'm pretty sure though, once there are some DETC accredited doctorates, or RA online JDs, SCUPS will go for some form of accreditation.

 

If you look at this website: http://www.scups.edu/university_info/approvals.asp

You can see that SCUPS is alright for CA residents, but I wouldn't pay for it.

 

Having a JD does not appear to be a problem for DETC. Look at Concord.


BinkWile wrote:
I think the big area of concern is SCUPS JD. Because CA will allow someone with a distance JD and that passes the bar exam to practice law, this would be a loss of money for SCUPS and Dr. Hecht. This is the reason why some people in NCU told me that SCUPS does not pursue WASC accreditation, because the JD will have to go away.

 

I think that rather than people just proposing nominees for a "best" non-accredited schools list, it might be more interesting and instructive for people to give a few reasons why they make the particular choices that they do.

What kind of things do you look for in a "good" non-accredited school? What kind of features impress you?

And why in the world are people discussing SCUPS? What could possibly justify including SCUPS on a 'best non-accredited' list?

 

For the sake of completeness, in addition to the DETC law schools, Concord and Taft, I have a soft spot for Northwestern California University which generates lawyers with regularity. There's also Oak Brook with a rather amazing record of Bar exam success but pronounced Christian orientation and religion based requirements that some may find off putting.

 

Outside of:

(i) certain religious or cultural institutions of higher learning,
(ii) some unaccredited institutions currently seeking or planning to seek some form of USDoE-recognized or foreign-equivalent accreditation, and
(iii) a few unaccredited institutions that do not need or want any form of official approval or sanction because most impartial observations and educational experts would vouch for their comparative academic and institutional quality ......

I am firmly and unapologetically of the opinion that there are very few to none unaccredited entities of higher learning (institutions, businesses, even licensed schools) that qualify as "best" of anything, in the sense of "best value," "best programs," or "best faculty," certainly not "best quality." Again, please note (and possibly expand or critique) my three categories and exceptions above.

The advice which is frequently given here on Degreeinfo by many contributors, that a prospective student must listen to and research what others say or write about an unaccredited school, and not merely rely on glossy brochures and sales/marketing hype put out by the unaccredited school itself, is worth its weight in gold.

Many of the entities (BJU, CPU, SCUPS, etc) cited in this thread by other posters above, belong to one of the three exception groups above. However, I am certain that I may have overlooked some other worthy category - and would appreciate it if someone corrected me or pulled my chain (....... smile).

Thanks.

 

Actually, Jake A, I would always recommend getting one's J.D. from an ABA accredited school, if at all practical.

But even a U.C. system J.D. now costs more than $60,000 in tuition alone. Private ABA schools are more. Much more.

I question whether such an enormous nvestment is actually justifiable for the older student who intends to remain and practice in California.

I question whether even a young student should necessarily incur this kind of debt if he or she intends to remain and practice in California in public interest or public sector positions.

Unless one seeks to work in a middle to major commercial firm, the LICENSE is more important than the DEGREE.

 

Thanks, Nosborne48. Two great points!

I agree, on both counts.

I have said before, elsewhere, that to me cost is one necessary factor but not a sufficient one, to limit anyone into selecting an unaccredited degree over an accredited one.

Also, Nosborne48, I sincerely would appreciate your providing further discussion and analysis of the cost comparisons and review in another thread that i have begun on the cost issue, elsewhere in these forums......).

Such analysis from you and other DL experts here on this board may prove beneficial to some future student or two contemplating spending X dollars here versus y dollars there (if both schools are, for discussion's sake, assumed to be of legitimate and acceptable academic quality).

Thanks in advance.

 

Glad to. I think that this subject is interesting.

With regards to (ii) planning to become accredited at some undefined future point doesn't tell me very much. I plan on becoming the Queen of England, myself. (And I will too.)

But actually appearing on an accreditor's list of upcoming site visits suggests that the applicant considers itself currently accreditable and is willing to invite outsiders to come and take a look.

If the school actually achieves candidacy, that tells me that the accreditors agree. Candidacy doesn't mean that every requirement is met, but it does suggest that the accreditor thinks that there's a reasonable expectation that they can and will be. My impression is that more applicants fail to achieve initial candidacy than fail to progress from candidacy to full accreditation.

Ok, moving on...

My rather tautological principle is that there's no reason to believe that a school is legitimate unless there's some reason to believe that it's legitimate.

Accreditation is perhaps the most reliable and widely accepted indicator of legitimacy. But certainly there are others, ranging from religious denominational affiliation to demonstrated research productivity.

What all these alternatives and/or additions to accreditation have in common is that they presuppose some detailed familiarity with the school in question. Since the general community is unlikely to possess that familiarity, this suggests that good non-accredited schools probably have most utility in smaller niche communities that are already familiar with them.

Yeah, but your first and third exceptions leave a lot of room for 'best' in particular contexts. That's one reason why I tried (without success) to get people to stop just randomly naming supposedly 'best' non-accredited schools and to start telling us why they think that they are among the best.

Here's another consideration.

Sometimes students don't have a vocational degree objective. I know because I'm one of them. My primary motivation for studying things at this point is to learn about things. I don't care a whole lot about degrees and certifications and it doesn't matter to me very much who does or doesn't recognize the education that I receive. Put another way, I see DL classes as an interactive analogue of library reading.

I do think that accreditation has importance, even in these circumstances. It gives me some indication that a course or a program is credible and sound. It suggests that I won't be wasting my time.

But I guess that I'm willing to take a chance if the enticements are attractive enough. What do I have to lose? I mean, if I feel that I'm wasting my time, I'll just drop out.

What I'm really looking for is whether or not a program treats the material that interests me at an appropriate level. So I look at course descriptions. I'm also very interested in whether the relevant communities and individuals that I respect recognize that the thing is legitimate. That's probably what carries the most weight with me right now.

Obviously things would be very different if I was trying to acquire a diploma that communicates something to employers and to clients.

 

BillDayson,

I'd LOVE to see a picture of you in drag!

I like your approach: Every school must prove itself and accreditation is the most common and universally recognized means of doing so.

 

I earned the Doctor of Business Administration at California Pacific University between the years of 1996 -- 2003, and I highly recommend the school for the DBA and the MBA, for applications outside of teaching college. I use my regionally accredited MBA from Santa Clara University for that application and am working toward a regionally-accredited Ph.D. at this moment. The Cal-Pacific DBA was invaluable preparation for the Ph.D. as the courses required graduate-level work and the doctoral project allowed me to get an application-oriented treatise out of my system to make way for the research-oriented dissertation. The delivery of the CPU DBA fit the restrictions in my work, church ministry and family situation that were in place at the time, so I highly recommend it to those so encumbered.

Best wishes,

Dave

 

I agree with this assessment. California Pacific University is small enough that curtailing the doctoral program to achieve DETC would be a considerable wager. Such a gambit could increase the utility of degrees but might have zero effect on the current quality of degree programs.

Dave

 

I don't see the need at this point in getting an unaccredited degree when there are so many options out there that are RA.

If I were to give an honorable mention though...
For schools that are NOT RA (although I know it's DETC accredited) I'd want to mention Catholic Distance University. If it gets advertised on EWTN one can rest assured it's not a degree mill. It wouldn't even surprise me if the courses were quite rigorous.

Another one I would point out is Clayton College or alternative medicine schools in general. I don't know too much about it so I would mention it with reservation. HOWEVER because the subject matter they teach (complementary and alternative medicine) is rather controversial, I would imagine it may be hard for them to even recieve any type of national accredidation. Thats not to say I'd put there degrees on the same level as RA nor would I want to see an unaccredited medical professional performing regular medicine. I would think though that schools of this nature MAY have some value. Career-wise I'm not sure what one can do with such a degree besides maybe work in a health food store and do a few Reikki sessions on the side. The important thing however is that the consumer is not mislead into thinking that their health care provider is providing something that is well..."alternative" and that they are not confused with a conventional doctor with an RA degree.

Bob Jones University- although their theology and policies are not my personal cup of tea, I'm sure their academic programs are quite respectable and I have heard of several public officials in the Southeast who have degrees from there.

My main point is although I an glad my degree is RA and would generally not recommend anything NOT RA (I'm very anti-degree-mill), I would think there are some exceptions in the case of alternative type schools whether they be Fundamentalist Christian, New Age, ultra-strict Catholic, complimentary and alternative medicine... Again it's not to say that the degrees should always be compared to RA or used in the same way. But maybe they're not ALL "degree mills", and do have a right to exist in a free country.

 

quote
posted by LJinPA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see the need at this point in getting an unaccredited degree when there are so many options out there that are RA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed!

Let the trumpeters sound this axiom to all and sundry!

Now, can you imagine the opposite view, like the following?

speculative quote
posted by ----- (insert your favorite mill shill's name here)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see the need at this point in getting an accredited degree when there are so many options out there that are unaccredited (and cheaper, and more convenient, and easier, and are of comparable quality, etc., ad nauseum
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, a character or two in here may say as much in some posts. Their intentions are as clear as mud.

Thank you, LJinPA, for giving me one more opportunity to help expose the "RA accreditation is no good/RA is no indicator of quality") mill shills some of whom may be temporarily sojourning in here.

The pummeling of these frauds and self-designated champions of unaccreditation has to be incessant and unrelenting - so I will not let the opportunity slide (.....smile).

Students/Newbies/Advice Seekers: listen up!

(Side note: I have referred some adult learners and students from a couple of my B&M Howard Univ. and UMUC classes) to come in here and seek some accredited DL advice. Do listen up and do not be fooled by some of the confusion and noise you may have encountered here.)

I am, myself, fairly new to these boards but I can proclaim with some degree of statistical confidence - to all newbies and students seeking various DL and degree/school-related advice and guidance in here - that LJinPA's quote above is the reasonable sentiment of the overwhelming majority of DL and education experts and contributors on here.

I say this because I spent a year here as a silent member/reader (lurker of the benign variety) and read and re-read almost all accreditation-related discussions and posts on these fora. I have great respect for the experts and other well-informed and helpful contributors on Degreeinfo.

One would be hard-pressed to find one expert and respected contributor in here with a contrarian view to LJinPA's.

I am not a betting man; I could be wrong but the chances thereof (of a Degreeinfo DL/education expert contributor holding an opposite view to LJinPA’s quote above) are slim to none.

But the mill shills do exist and some are temporarily in here!

They loudly and obnoxiously do hold the opposite view in other online fora, pop up in here to preach their gospel of non-accreditation, and disappear, only to reappear, and repeat the cycle all over.

Imagine someone with the view:

---------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see the need at this point in getting an accredited degree when there are so many options out there that are unaccredited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, I am sure you have heard something akin to this posted in here and elsewhere.

The posters of such nonsense may include: certain reclusive and anonymous posters, flagrant mill shills, some "co-conspirators" (i.e. knowing purchasers - they are not students - who willingly choose sub-standard operations and outright mills to furnish them with a "degree" or two for little to no work, others seek a quick degrees-are-us adornment and anointment); still others are shady characters who vocally oppose accreditation of all varieties.

So, student beware!

quote
posted by LJinPA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
My main point is although I an glad my degree is RA and would generally not recommend anything NOT RA (I'm very anti-degree-mill), I would think there are some exceptions in the case of alternative type schools whether they be Fundamentalist Christian, New Age, ultra-strict Catholic, complimentary and alternative medicine... Again it's not to say that the degrees should always be compared to RA or used in the same way. But maybe they're not ALL "degree mills", and do have a right to exist in a free country.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ipso facto.

Thanks.

 

In my view, it depends on the needs of the individual. I suppose that if RA degree programs met all the needs of distance learners and were completely known in the marketplace, then DETC, State-approved and Unaccredited schools would not exist, and no student would consider matriculating foreign degree programs.

Dave