Why the animosity between DETC and RA?

I didn't see any fire. Perhaps a little smoke but no fire.

 

Maybe a little hot air mixed with that smoke?

Seriously though, I think that DETC supporters feel like their accomplishments are under attack. I don't think an attack is usually intended, but I can understand a little touchiness on the subject. I feel a little attacked about NCU sometimes, but I am confident that it is a good school, so I don't get too upset.

 

I think its the otherway around that RA feel heat!!!! Any mention of NA as oppose to RA, some really thinks (I assume here) gets hot under the collar..

 

Perhaps so. Or perhaps both do. I think both types of degrees are worthy of our respect. I agree with the initial question for this thread, why should there be such hard feelings? Let's all give each other the respect we would like to have given to us, that's a paraphrase from my most valued mentor.

 

I've said this before, I'll say it again.

I think Migara is trolling on this issue. S/he raised the exact same issue in another thread, where it was soundly addressed by multiple people. Now s/he is asking the exact same questions once again.

Please do not feed the troll.

 

Chip, I think you must be stupid or something!!!! I did not raise this thread, merely responding.
I did post a previous thread asking a legitimate question re Accreditation as I am planning to enroll with DETC school.
In my previous thread you (Chip), accused me of being a Troll…. Asking a valid question that was of importance to me. Isn’t this forum about asking questions? No matter how silly or stupid one may think? It may sound a stupid question to others, but no question is Stupid.
You responded to my previous thread of asking a question to starting an agenda. When said stated that DETC school should be able to carry more research and RA schools as most cases DETC schools offers 4-6 programs as opposed to RA schools. Here you accused me of having an Agenda.

For an Administrator you have a poor judgement and in-fact you being a prick now.

 

If you look closely the owners of this board are trying (I believe again) to monetize the site through supporting certain schools (they have said this in recent threads). As such, I as an avid reader but not a big poster, have notice some of the moderators playing a more active role to push certain views, and discredit other views. As always in things it comes down to money, and the days of this board being unbiased may be behind it. This is what happens when you try to make money by supporting one thing over another and controlling the flow of information.

Now, I’ll be crazy attacked for having said this, and in the end I don’t personally think there is anything wrong with trying to make money, I just think it is important to understand why certain views are supported over others.

 

Not for lack of trying. This is one of the more artful troll-threads that we've seen around here for some time.

It piggybacks on another flame-filled thread (that the same person started, btw) and asks "everyone" to expose their most passionate grievances and resentments yet another time for his enjoyment. But it also includes a nice note of plausible-deniability, with the thread starter "innocently" saying that he doesn't intend to start any trouble (which indicates that he knows precisely what he was doing). I can imagine the sly smirk as he typed that. It even allowed him to take the high-ground and criticise thread participants for expressing the very same angry passion that he had just asked them to revisit.

He's actually rather good at this. Look at how the thread has subsequently evolved.

 

Classy.

 

I tried to point out exactly what you are saying... The OP is vehement that he was just trying to gain valuable information that he did not already have...

I am still not 100% convinced...

 

Having been a member of this forum for nine years I have not seen any evidence of bias by the owner or administrators (apart from bias against spam which I agee with).

 

Yea, Bill. I'm so good I even fooled myself. I thought I was honestly asking why everyone was so touchy, honestly trying to understand.

I had myself so deluded that I suggested that this thread be closed. I also apologized to everyone for starting this in the first place. I must have been the most crafty troll ever, don't you think? Thank you for setting me straight.

 

PS. Read through all of the other threads. There is a lot of chest thumping going on, but nobody really stepped back and gave a reason why the anger starts so quickly. I find it astonishing. For example, the previous poster that called the mod a "prick" for just doing his job.

So call me a troll if you want, I've been called worse. There was no intentional trolling going on, even if the effect was the same. My apologies to you all.

 

So, ........ if I got this right, and based upon all of the comments on this thread, IF, you wanted to become a troll, AND, you wanted to be the best troll out there, would you be considering an RA program or would a DETC program suffice?

I'm still not clear on this salient point. Thanks.

 

Very cute, wise guy.

 

Nothing wrong with enrolling at a DETC school. The degree is legitimate. All I'm saying is that there are, at least in the US, some significant limitations to DETC degrees that don't exist for RA degrees, particularly at the undergraduate level. If you've done your research and decided that a DETC degree will fulfill your needs, and won't limit your future opportunities, then it could be an excellent choice for you.

Absolutely correct. But when the same question has been asked, answered, and fully addressed, and then you post again with nearly the same question, that is being trollish.

I'm going to assume English is not your native language and give you a break here. I'm not sure exactly what you're saying, but I think you're implying that somehow stating facts (that academic research, publishing, and development of new areas of inquiry comes almost solely from RA institutions in the US rather than DETC institutions) is having an agenda. And that isn't the case. Any DETC school could challenge that notion by hiring professors interested in ongoing research and funding that research. But I don't know of any that do.

You're lucky I'm in a good mood today, as personal attacks are prohibited by our TOS. Since the attack is on me, I'll let it slide this time, but if your attitude doesn't change, I won't let it slide next time.

 

That's not exactly what I said. It is true that certain schools -- and unfortunately, it tends to disproportionately be the for-profit schools that tend to be less "bang for the buck" than the smaller nonprofit schools -- buy advertising, pay for inquiries, and the like. And it's also true that we will be accepting advertising from those schools, and any other legitimate schools that want to advertise.

But unlike all of the other websites out there that promote distance learning, we will not avoid promoting or recommending schools that don't pay us at all; if you were to look at the database of schools we had online in 2003, you'd see that only about 10% of the schools in it paid for their listings And if you look at any of my recent posts about degree completion or bachelors degrees, I often recommend the Big 3 (Charter Oak State College, Excelsior College, and Thomas Edison State College) because they are among the best choices, in most cases, for completing a credible, quality degree quickly and inexpensively. Yet none of those schools pay us anything for recommending them.

Likewise, I would not feel comfortable for myself, nor asking anyone else on the mod team at DegreeInfo, to recommend any school over another unless I honestly felt it to be the best choice.

OK, there are two separate issues here.

One is whether opposing viewpoints are stifled, and if you look through the history of posts and discussions in our thread archive, dating back to 2001, I think you'll see pretty clearly that the answer to that is no. In fact, I and the rest of the mod team have always encouraged healthy debate, as long as it remains relatively polite and civil, and stays away from personal attacks. We don't allow anyone to shill for their own school or website, but we've had quite a few individuals from various schools, including admissions staff, that have regularly contributed here, and we have encouraged that, provided the affiliation is disclosed, and the school is legitimate (ie, meets GAAP accreditation standards). As far as I can remember, none of the schools we used to be paid to feature and promote had staff members that were active on DegreeInfo, while many of the nonprofit schools that did not pay us for promotion did have regular contributors. And that's fine. and as long as helps answer questions about programs, I think that everyone wins.

The second issue is whether Degreeinfo's corporate viewpoint is unbiased. And the answer to that is, it has never been. If you look at what we wrote in 2002 here you'll see that we've made it clear that we don't like unaccredited schools, and although we didn't directly state it, we strongly felt back then that DETC schools were substantially inferior to RA schools and were generally not worthy of consideration when there was a good RA alternative. Accordingly, we did not include DETC schools in our searchable database, and there were one or two very large, very well known distance learning RA schools that we also refused advertising from because they were the source of constant complaints on DegreeInfo.

As I've stated elsewhere, our corporate viewpoint on DETC (which, not coincidentally, tends to mirror my personal opinion) has evolved significantly since then, in large part because I believe the utility of DETC degrees has also evolved. While I would still advocate, all other factors being equal, going for an RA degree over a DETC degree, I do now believe that DETC is gaining traction as an accreditor and that the acceptance of DETC degrees has grown. Accordingly, there are quite a few situations -- the very low-cost AJU masters degree being an excellent example -- of where a DETC degree could be a great value, and a good choice, provided that the prospective student understands that there may be some limits to the utility of a DETC degree, at least at present.

As we enhance the overall offerings of Degreeinfo in coming weeks and months, and begin to monetize it again, we will be featuring a lot of for-profit schools. But we will also be seeking partnerships, individually, with non-profits and other high value programs that typically don't advertise, and we will continue to promote and recommend lots of schools like Charter Oak and Edison that tend to do llittle or no advertising, and who don't pay us a dime for recommending them.

If anyone ever does get any indication that any staff member at DegreeInfo, any article we publish, or any posting in our message boards (other than ads or whatever that may appear) appears to be recommending a school or program that is a bad choice, or is a more expensive choice than another, I would appreciate being messaged about it.

Just so everyone knows, we have been approached a half dozen times over the past two years with proposals to purchase DegreeInfo, and have turned down offers in the 6 figures. If money was the focus, we would certainly have sold. But we do believe that we can continue to provide the best, most accurate resource for information on distance learning and still make a little bit of money in the process, if nothing else, to cover the costs of operating the site.

I hope this clarifies our position.

 

I think the whole accusation by Redman is ridiculous. Anyone who consistently reads the posts by the mods here should be able to see clearly that there is little to no bias in favor of certain schools. I've read most posts on this board for the past six months and have found no evidence of any bias or proffering.

Geez, this thread seems to have brought out the worst in people.

 

I agree. I don't see any unfair biases here. The moderators should and do offer opinions. It's only a problem if counter ideas are silenced, which is not the case.

In regard to the original question, I believe the animosity comes from inflexible or absolute statements, such as NA proponents arguing that NA is equal to RA in all ways and RA people says NA degrees are worthless. Everything has to be qualified to come close to the truth. Short blanket statements about complex topics almost always fall short.

 

Yes, I agree. Overgeneralizing is often the instigator of many conflicts. Statements like this should be avoided: "All (insert race) are lazy." "All DL proponents are snobs" "All DETC degrees are worthless" None of this is true in the general sense and stating things in these terms leads to hard feelings and conflicts.