Accredited vs. non-accredited doctoral degree?

If you say so. I posted this (partly) because it obviously wasn't established when Dr. Levicoff wrote what he wrote.
Don't use a technicality to deny me a rare opportunity to prove my tiny bit of superior knowledge. :smile:

J.

 

Well, you see, FT, it’s like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it’s the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive posting kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular posting eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine.

And that, FT, is why you always feel smarter after a few posts.

 

That's one heck of a theory, I think we ought to stick with it, make it the slogan of the site.

I have a different observation: I've found that I feel really smart where I'm really dumb and really dumb where I'm really smart.

 

If you didn't recognize it, I altered a Cliff Clavin spiel. It was to Norm and it was about beer and not posting.

And I only get laughs when I'm being serious. It's a tough world.

 

Well, now I'm really embarrassed. I share a name with the patron Saint of Poland, and yet did not recognize one of the most common Western Slavic names! I should have at least remembered Jan Hus, Czech reformer and inspiration for a major rebellion, from 8th grade history class. For shame. Sorry, Jan.

 

Missed that reference, yet shouldn't have, because now that you mention it, I remember it. You made the mistake of trying to be too clever with me, I'm used to discussions with my children, who are as young as three, and my wife, who has taken in my increasingly confused middle aged years to explaining things slowly to me, as to an imbecile. So it's not like I get subtlety anymore.

 

Actually, I'm full of compassion. It's just that when I run into people who are gluttons for punishment, like Jan or Rich, I try to accommodate their needs. Um, out of compassion. It's hardly an obsession, but it is fun.

Jan can actually write quite well, although he or she is clearly in over his or her head and has been reduced to one-liners. (Yes, because of the last few posts, we're back to he or she. Or it.)

By the way, you'll find that I am far warmer toward those who post sincere inquiries and don't try to come off as experts in fields where they are clearly not authorities. Especially when they purport to be looking for a doctorate. Doctors, by nature, are striving to become authorities, and presumably leaders, in their fields. If they don't have what it takes, the time to bring it out is now. Because someone with a doctoral title can do far more harm to the public than those who don't run around calling themselves Doctor. Doctors, by nature, will have a chance to spend plenty of time on the hot seat. And many of them will turn out to be mediocre at best.

Jan has impressed me as someone who will never get a doctorate - he or she will hand too much shit to his or her doctoral committee. But who knows, they could put Jan in his place. Or her place. Or its place. I seriously wish Jan the best, but until he, she, or it lightens up, then he, she, or it will go nowhere with the goal with which he, she, or it came to DI.

BTW, to Johann: Nice catch. But then, you're always had a more international perspective than I have. Even though south of the border between us, I tend to be more, um, provincial.

 

I have to admit Levicoff that you reign supreme as an authority on issues relating to warmth, compassion and distance learning. This is obvious to anyone who reviews your kind, supportive and helpful responses on numerous previous threads and posts on this and another forum. This is as factual as I am Queen Elizabeth! (Lmao)

 

I'm not a clinical psychologist and don't pretend to be. I certainly don't want to pontificate. But you asked a question and here's an answer to it.

Here's the New York State requirements for clinical psychology licensure. (That's your state XYZ)

NYS Psychology:License Requirements

NY State requires that Clinical Psychology license applicants have a doctoral degree in Psychology awarded by a program registered with the NY State Education Department as license qualifying, or from a program determined to be substantially equivalent.

To be considered substantially equivalent, the program must be offered by a program "accredited by an accrediting organization acceptable to the department or recognized by the appropriate civil authorities of the jurisdiction in which the school is located as an acceptable doctoral program in psychology".

The program must consist of at least 3 years of full-time study or the part-time equivalent, and must include at least 30 semester hours of coursework obtained at the doctoral degree granting institution.

NY State goes on to specify that at least three semester hours in numerous specified subjects must be included in the program.

The program must also include one year of supervised practicum, internship, field experience or applied research, as defined in Section 7601-A of Title 8 of the NY Education Law.

This is in addition to two years of full-time supervised experience required after the degree is awarded.

Anyone interested can verify all of this for themselves here:

NYS Psychology:License Requirements

I'll add that it doesn't require a PhD and 20 years of teaching experience to learn these things. This is the kind of information that prospective psychology doctoral students will have to determine for their own states/provinces, before they enroll in their doctoral programs.

 

Good questions. Now prior to my responding we would like to hear SPECIFIC books on higher education and distance learning YOU have written? Also your actual name please, as has been demanded of me, other than your concealment behind your pseudonym. Keep in mind that you claim to be the savant, not I.

 

Thank you.
My take: it may - MAY - be possible to structure a IUGS doctorate to conform to this, so it's possible a determined student might use it for licensure. However, there are several potential pitfalls that may result in such degree to be found NOT substantially equivalent. If NYS license is ultimate goal, vast majority of applicants would be wise to use a more certain course of study. I might add that I have my own experience fighting a professional body over a foreign degree, well documented here (search for DEAC in Canada thread). Even though the degree in question (Ashworth) was clearly recognized at home and eventually my friend got her license, most people would want to avoid the grief. (Update: CECE of Ontario now updated their policy to explicitly require WES recognition. Ashworth now officially doesn't qualify. )

In my searches, I found one person in New Jersey who is according to one web page is a licensed Psychologist in NY, with IUGS degree. However, I could not find that person in NYS public registry nor verify the license number given. Very likely this is a mistake on the unofficial directory site, that person practices in NJ using her Masters-level license, and is not a NY psychologist.

 

Have you discussed your proclivity to engage in inconsequential ranting and aspersions with your local bartender? We can just imagine your reaction to a significant issue. Thank the Lord that we have a detente! LOL

 

I think the house should disallow masse shots. And no jumping the ball.

 

Stanislav, you've given this issue your best shot and have basically come up empty handed. This is not a put down but a statement of fact. Btw, if one was to attempt to obtain approval from a Psychology state board of licensure, and they are resistant to providing this license due to IUGS not meeting their criteria, resulting in an adversarial situation, I assure you that this will be a very inauspicious start and an unhappy ending with the board.

 

I knew it all the time and Levicoff just confirmed it with his above response! He's actually a talking Lamb. LOL

 

Dude, I'm agreeing with you. While I do not know what authority you posses to "assure" us like you do, this is clearly a risk most aspiring psychologists should avoid. Now, note how this differs from declaring that all IUGS degrees lack "credibility" or similar ill-defined quality. If you speak in terms of utility for specific purposes, you're clearly on the firmer ground.

 

Well that is why I primarily emphasized this school's PsyD program as an exsmple in my previous posts. However, as I also mentioned, generally, if one is planning to use a doctorate from this school for the purpose of enhancing their career status or employment opportunities they are taking a significant risk because many human resource departments of mainstream organizations are quite conscious of schools that raise a red flag pertaining to their legitimacy and credibility.

Now if one wishes to use such a doctorate to promote their private consultation practice it may be helpful UNLESS there is any legal dispute with their client (s), which may result in their unaccredited degree being the plantiff's lawyers target to demonstrate misrepresentation on the part of the possessor of the doctorate.

Just some "food" for thought.

 

Steve, I've graded a lot of student papers over the last decade plus, as well as participated six summers in writing assessment for the university here, and while Jan clearly has a grasp on the English language, he (I changed opinion, Jan's a "he", women are not typically fatuous in the manner of Jan) does not write well, he writes in the stilted manner of one trying very hard--desperately--to write well,to keep up a front, but not quite hitting the mark, like an eight year old girl trying on mom's clothes.

 

Not with "things". With the problem of how prospective students should go about making judgments about mysterious online universities operating out of unfamiliar places where academic standards are unknown.

Stop puffing yourself up and demonstrating your own emotional insecurity. Put your assumed superiority to use by addressing the question.

And proud of it. Frankly I don't care about what you think of me. All I care about is whether you can add anything substantial to the discussion of how to best assess things like IUGS. That's where you could conceivably be of help to others.

That's a bad analogy and you should know it. The question doesn't depend on anyone here having expert knowledge of chemistry, psychology or roofing. The question is how one identifies credible and competent research/clinical training in chemistry or psychology, or competent roofers with good business practices.

 

Well, going by your own information, most students do not intend to use the degree for licensure.

You may want to define what you mean by "legitimacy" and "credibility" here. Also, a person does not generally need to work in "many" organizations; one employer will suffice. I'd also wager IUGS is obscure enough for most HR departments to not have any awareness of it one way or another.
What you really describe is certain image problems and lack of prestige associated with this school. Why yes, yes it has a few image issues. That's why it's a marginal choice, not mainstream choice.

This forum has a few people well versed in DL history going back to the seventies. I don't believe what you describe happened much at all, even with blatant degree mills like say Columbia State. It would be discussed in this forum otherwise.
Going by your hypothetical scenario, a defendant's lawyer would simply point to things that made a defendant sincerely believe the school was accredited. NAB website screenshot would suffice. So unless we're talking regulated practice here (medicine, psychology), I don't see a potential for showing misrepresentation here.