Can someone explain this to me?

So I'm reading along in quite a good paper just published by the Center for Studies in Higher Education at Berkeley: "Money, Politics and the Rise of For-Profit Higher Education" by John Douglass (cshe.berkeley.edu/publications), and I come upon this revelation on page 5:

"The six regional accreditation agencies remain the gold standard for pubic and private nonprofit universities, while national accrediting entities...provided easier paths for FPs."

Can some careful reader explain this to me? Thank you.

 

"....while national accrediting entities...provided easier paths for FPs."

Dr. Bear,

In my own interpretation, the author states that it is easier for private for-profit academic institutions to achieve national accreditation. That means national accreditation has lower standards. I believe the author implies on Everrest College, Westwood College, ITT Tech, and etc.; but he does not realize that most of for-profit schools (Capella University, Grand Canyon University, Northcentral University, University of Phoenix, Walden University, Colorado Technical University, University of the Rockies, Brown College, DeVry University, Kaplan University, Strayer University, and etc.) are regional accredited.

 

Dr Bear:

Contrary to the above post, I'm sure Douglass is aware of the RA schools in this category. I think it's explained further down in the text.

The Douglass paper goes on to say that often, students found their investment in an NA program was not worth what they thought it was. Douglass says they experienced difficulty (or impossibility) if they tried to transfer credits etc. to RA schools.

Then - on goeth the light :smile:

"Recognizing this market disadvantage, corporate FPs sought regional accreditation, sometimes by buying a struggling but already-accredited nonprofit institution" - Douglass

So that's why (according to Douglass) so many corporate FP schools sought (and mostly received) regional accreditation; it was seen as a real marketing advantage. Douglass implies (as I read it) that this class of FP schools would not likely have sought regional accreditation otherwise.

Johann

 

I "just" found out that Liberty University accepts both NA and RA transfer credits and degrees.. They are RA, it appears that they don't read the Douglass.

 

Yep - so does Western Governors U. Then again, WGU is double-accredited, RA and NA. Things ain't what they used to be. You can use those NA credits a lot more places than you could years ago. Some NA schools (e.g. Penn Foster) have practically all ACE reviewed courses - lots of mileage in them!

We've had threads before on where one can use NA credits in the RA world. Here's a sample.

http://www.degreeinfo.com/general-distance-learning-discussions/29168-acceptance-na-credits-ra-schools.html

Liberty? Doesn't surprise me. Why? I've read some posts (in another forum) from a person who was accepted to a Liberty Master's program. His Bachelor's degree wasn't even NA. It was from a California approved unaccredited institution. Apparently, his school (not a religious one, BTW) was on Liberty's acceptable list for "previous education."

I just re-checked those old postings elsewhere. That person indeed stated he was accepted, as I described. He advised further that he opted out of Liberty shortly after acceptance, ultimately completing a Master's at a different school, (unaccredited) solely because the program was a "better fit" with his academic interests and post-degree ambitions.

Getting back to Douglass - I think he also realizes, re: NA - that was then, this is now. :smile:

Johann

 

I hasten to add - because the 10 minutes is up - I'm being presumptuous in my pretense to read the mind of author Douglass.

What I should have said is:

I believe Douglass was talking historically - about the marketing advantage of being RA back in the day, when NA was not nearly as accepted as it is now. RA is still, of course, ahead in acceptance, but the gap has narrowed somewhat. I'm not suggesting it'll ever disappear completely.

For schools today, there is still an RA marketing advantage. Probably a bit less of an advantage than before, in some cases, and achievable only with considerable difficulty and much cost. I expect pros and cons of RA vs. NA vary greatly with individual schools and their business models.

Johann

 

When was the last time an online FP received RA? Even HLC, which was once receptive to FP and accredited most of the mentioned institutions is now being cautious and turning away FP schools that apply.

 

WASC approved a change in ownership of Patten University in June 2012. Patten was formerly a faith-based non-profit school in Oakland with some online operations. Now it is a secular for-profit school, with a primarily online enrollment.

UniversityNow, Inc. controls both RA Patten University and DETC New Charter University.

 

Do I need to insert a "sic"?

Excuse me, but I said "careful reader." We don't have one yet.

Try reading it again. Carefully. Word by word.

"The six regional accreditation agencies remain the gold standard for pubic and private nonprofit universities, while national accrediting entities...provided easier paths for FPs."

 

Pubic... sheesh.

 

A typo I'd never have noticed unaided... QED.

Ain't never bin ta one o' them there universities o' that type. Folks tryin' to pull the wool over muh eyes agin....dawggone it! :smile:

Johann