DETC Accrediting Commission Meeting - June 2008 Edition

The meeting is concluding today. Going by previous experience, we should have the results sometime next week. Here are the new applicants:

Abraham Lincoln University School of Law, Los Angeles, CA
Aerobics and Fitness Association of America, Sherman Oaks, CA
American Center for Conflict Resolution, Euclid, OH
American Fitness Professionals and Associates, Manahawkin, NJ
American Graduate School of Education, Tempe, AZ
Anaheim University, Anaheim, CA
Apollos University, Huntington Beach, CA
BILD International University, Ames, IA
California Miramar University (formerly Pacific Western University) San Diego, CA
California University of Technology, Diamond Bar, CA
ChildCare Education Institute, Duluth, GA
Hawthorn University, Whitehorn, CA
The Institute of Business and Finance, La Jolla, CA
Institute for Innovative Technologies in Educational Programs, Columbus, GA
International Sports Sciences Association, Carpinteria, CA
Lion Investigation Academy, Bethlehem, PA
The National Institute of Whole Health, Wellesley, MA
Perelandra College, LaMesa, CA
University of Atlanta, Mobile, AL
Yorktown University, Inc., Denver, CO

 

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the DETC requires an on-campus visit to award accreditation to distance learning schools?

 

I don't really have a problem with this.

Given the less than perfect backgrounds of some of the applicants, I think either an on site visit or an external audit should be required, to make sure there isn't any funny business going on in the information submitted to DETC for use in the decision making process.

 

Hi Rich! That is so funny. I was wondering the same thing, "onsite campus-visit" for totally distant schools? Shouldn't it be an onsite visit as there is no campus?

Just funny. ;-)

 

It was a joke. But, by extension, doesn't the same problem exist between the schools and students they never see?

If I was running DETC, I'd develop a virtual approach involving a self study, a review of artifacts (curricula, policies and procedures, student work/assessments, finances, facilities, etc.), and one or more synchronous online meetings.

 

Would you hold a school's history against it if it were formerly millish?

 

Good question. has a formerly millish school ever actually made the leap from millish to accredited? Outside of CCU that is.
Also, who did The Univeristy of Atlanta used to be.... i can't remember...

 

The University of Atlanta is the formerly millish Barrington University.

 

In addition to Atlanta/Barrington, there was a time when Columbia Southern University, Andrew Jackson University, and Southwest University (all now DETC-accredited) fell into the "less than wonderful" category.

 

American College of Computer & Information Sciences then change to American Graduate School of Management and now American Sentinel University. Correction please if am wrong.

 

Actually, American College for Computer and Information Sciences never "changed into" American Graduate School of Management; rather, the two merged into American Sentinel University www.americansentinel.edu . American College of Computer and Information Sciences' predecessor organization - the pre-DETC American Institute for Computer Studies - was arguably a bit millish, or so I'm told.

 

Yes, I would. But DETC doesn't always do it. As we know, they accredited both Andrew Jackson U. and at least one other school claimed bogus accreditation from WAUC right up until the day they received DETC accreditation, clearly a deceptive advertising practice and a violation of DETC's accreditation standards.

That's why I feel a need for a complete firewall between K-WU and Warren National. There should be no perception that Warren National is the "new" K-WU--they should be distinct and separate.

(Regarding DETC and bogus accreditation claims, I would have required those schools to operate for a year without any accreditation claims.)

 

U of Atlanta used to be Barrington U.

I'm not convinced CCU was very millish after about 1980. Not accreditable, surely, but not millish. But this is just an opinion--it's hard to quantify.

 

But isn't Warren National simply K-WU using another name?

 

Another thing I've noticed about some of the schools on DETC's potential accreditation list is that they already offer doctorates. I thought DETC was accrediting only a limited number of school which offer such programs, but they had to be accredited before they could start offering them. For example, CCU dropped its doctorate programs in order to obtain DETC accreditation.

 

Note the verb "should be."

 

California University of Technology? Of course the similarly of this name to the California Institute of Technology is completely unintentional

 

One important reason DETC conducts an on-campus visit is due to Federal regulation. Federal criteria for national recognition states that to be recognized, an agency must:

* "Conduct at least one on-site review of the institution or program during which it obtains sufficient information to determine if the institution or program complies with the agency's standards;”

* CHEA criteria for recognition also requires an agency to conduct an onsite review by a visiting team to each applicant.

Finally, DETC does much of its work prior to the onsite visit, including team members’ review of the extensive institutional self evaluation reports, auditing of virtual course curricula, offsite curricula evaluations by professors, surveys of randomly selected students by the DETC itself, surveys of state and federal agencies and pre-visit evaluations of institutional websites by visiting teams.

The purpose of the onsite visit by a team is to validate the information in the self study and gather additional facts and explanations from interviews and direct observation.

Once again we see how DETC can be so cavalierly mischaracterized, and misperceived, in an otherwise well-meaning post. Had Rich done his homework and been more knowledgeable about accrediting association recognition rules and common accreditation practice, he would have certainly known that every recognized accrediting body is required by ED and by CHEA (if CHEA recognized) to have an onsite team visit to each applicant.

 

Having heard about the "not so wonderful" KW, I ask the same thing: Isn't WN simply KW using another name? (IF it has changed radically, then the identities indeed "should be" distinct from each other...)

 

Interesting. How does one do an "on-site review" of a wholly online institution?