Breaking News-Nationsuniversity withdraws DETC Accreditation

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by saharapost, Jul 1, 2013.

  1. RoscoeB

    RoscoeB Senior Member

    Thanks for news about University of the People


    Thanks for the update on the University of the People.

  2. LearningAddict

    LearningAddict Well-Known Member

    Ah, I see. Thanks for that info :smile:
  3. LearningAddict

    LearningAddict Well-Known Member

    Yeah, that's a tough one there. I guess not everyone has come around just yet.
  4. latebloomer

    latebloomer New Member

    Got an answer back for the update on Nations. I was referred to their updated standing page. I am glad to know this so I can move on to a brick and mortar accredited college. Here is what is updated on their standing page:
    "NationsUniversity complies with the standards of a recognized accrediting body and yet still operates as an unaccredited institution. In the process of planning toward the goal of accreditation, we discovered some advantages and disadvantages, making the decision to pursue accreditation a rather difficult one. The advantages of accreditation are numerous, including academic respectability, more open doors for its services, and enhanced opportunities for alumni. From our point of view, disadvantages include increased costs that must be passed on to students, curtailment of creativity and innovation, cumbersome and dysfunctional policies that do not work well in a global environment, and the requirement to conform to single-country standards. Presently, the Board of Regents is weighing the potential of each path. Foremost in the mind of the Regents is the institutional mission. There is no question but that over the past five years as we prepared for an accreditation bid, NU has become a better school—academically, administratively, and in its services to students. High standards will be maintained regardless of the path NU takes. Meanwhile, NU is not presently an applicant to any accrediting commission."
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 14, 2014
  5. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    "From our point of view, disadvantages include increased costs that must be passed on to students, curtailment of creativity and innovation, cumbersome and dysfunctional policies that do not work well in a global environment, and the requirement to conform to single-country standards. Presently, the Board of Regents is weighing the potential of each path....Meanwhile, NU is not presently an applicant to any accrediting commission."

    Not that it really matters, but I detect a heavy taste of "sour grapes." After all, it took Nations SIX YEARS of accreditation attempts, despite these "disadvantages," to come to this conclusion -- only once all hope was gone.

    I still cannot figure why someone at Nations would lead our poster on - (dmccullau) saying Nations was still up for consideration at the January DETC meeting. That's unforgivable in a secular school - doubly so in a religious one!

    Cheer up, Nations! If you change your minds (again) there's always ASIC or ACI! :sad:

    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 14, 2014
  6. Garp

    Garp Well-Known Member

    We don't know what happened. I do not think they have ever been actually voted on for accreditation. From what I recall they of course had the successful apps, they reported a successful site visit just before the fumbling over State issues. What happened this time I do not know.

    I think they are sincere and correct in noting above that they have benefited from the accreditation process (improvements to their program). Even prior to beginning that their graduates were accepted into some accredited graduate programs and did well.

    What is clear is that they have adminstrative and possibly systemic administrative issues that need addressing. Also, they will have to explain the January business you note above.

    Another thing is that although they may be correct that they have little need for accreditation and that their program is of high quality, they now have this prolonged trail of attempting to get through the accreditation process. That is some baggage no matter how you look at it.
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 14, 2014
  7. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Yes, they did. At least one of the established avenues appears to have been discontinued (Nations to Lipscomb U.) but others (e.g. Liberty) have taken its place. As long as they keep up their established standards, I think a number of Nations grads will find their way into established graduate programs.

    Yes it is. The school now has lots of baggage, pretty well all courtesy of administrative (not academic) errors and oversights. It will take great effort, over a long time, to overcome.

    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 15, 2014
  8. Jodie216

    Jodie216 New Member

    DETC refused to act on NU's application and is requiring a new application and site visit before they will vote on NU. Therefore, NU has filed a new application and will go through the site visit again. The administration at NU had thought the vote would take place in January and was as surprised as everyone else when NU was not considered. I would not give up on NU yet, this is a lot more difficult than most know. That is all I can say at this time.
  9. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    I'm not saying it's easy - it isn't meant to be. But how come other schools manage complete the process in two years or less, start to finish? E.G. University of the People (a new school!) and plenty of others.

    Sounds like somebody there really didn't know what was going on, re: their own school. That's awful.

    I won't give up on Nations as a school - but I see no reason here not to give up (as I already have) on its DETC Accreditation prospects. I won't be watching Game 3 very closely - if there really is a game 3 in this six (or is it seven?) year Comedy of Errors..

    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 6, 2014
  10. AdjunctInstructor

    AdjunctInstructor New Member

    The statements you make are very harsh. For one thing UoP received quite a bit of funding for their accreditation pursuit and they do have some very experienced and renowned educators on board so the comparison is unfair. Moreover, you do a lot of speculating concerning the state authorization issue for which you do not know the particulars. You continually attack the administrators using your own assumptions which are just that assumptions. I must remind you that as far as assessment goes NU had obstacles to climb in that they do not have terminal points for courses or programs and in assessment you have to have something to grab a hold of to report. It is difficult to reach accreditation standards if your assessment plan is not able to demonstrate course, program, and institutional outcomes. In other words many times it is better to start with a new school and have proper policies and procedures in place form the start. NU has had a difficult time meeting standards because of prior structures including pedagogy, assessment, and organizational structure. Essentially NU has been redesigning all units of the university including its organizational culture. As far as being on the accreditation commissions table this past Jan NU was. However, it was determined by the commission that the 18 month old file and 3 year old application was too dated to move forward. NU is working feverishly to update the SER and other tasks. Who knows what will take place NU had something like 25 in compliance and a couple of partial compliance findings after the latest site visit. What does that mean? Who knows a school can be turned down for even one partial compliance. My opinion is that you are upset with NU for personal reasons in that your postings reflect anger above the typical critique. My advice to you is to reflect on the challenges that administrators face during the current education reform era and stop attacking them with speculations that you do not know a lot about. I applaud UoP and the others that have attained accreditation relatively quickly. However, all schools are different and have different starting points and it so happens NU had to go through a process of breaking away from the older structures before it could reach a good starting point. NU is a learning organization and it continually learns to do things more efficiently and effectively. "Comedy of errors" I do not think that is even close to what it is. Will NU attain accreditation who knows? Have the NU volunteers and paid staff been sincere and dedicated as they have worked over the years to attain accreditation. You bet. Are they the best staff ? Of course not... the Ivy league has em all. Bottom line NU cares about its students and wants to offer extremely affordable Christian education. NU is seeking accreditation mainly so that its students have some transcript/degree portability. Also the Nigerian graduates use to be able to teach Bible course without accredited degrees, but that has changed, they need accredited degrees to teach Bible course in Nigerian schools.
  11. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    I once taught, but have never managed a school. I have, however, successfully managed a couple of businesses in my working days. No matter what the enterprise, a good grasp of the regulatory framework is always mandatory. That is not an assumption. It seems Nations administrators - who claim to have been "blindsided" - did not meet this vital requirement.

    Nations' answer to its "sudden" jurisdiction problem was to move from Tennessee to Louisiana. Is it any wonder that a new site visit is necessary? No surprise, here - despite your excuses above about the "old" file and application. As you say, University of the People has some "experienced and renowned educators" on board. Is that an admission that Nations hasn't any?

    Just as you say. This may well be one of those times. In the words of John D. Loudermilk (Tobacco Road)

    "Bring dynamite -- and a crane,
    Blow it up and start over again..."

    And yes - I am upset with Nations. Ineptness of this staggering, colossal magnitude always upsets me. That is the sole reason. My prediction: Nations is unlikely to get accredited. Why? Everything else aside, I can see it failing financial requirements at some point. Looking at even very the few numbers published here, I am amazed that the school is still operating, facing such a huge deficit.

    It's too bad. I admire the school's purpose, but it looks like an eventual victim of its own management. Probably quite suddenly, and maybe soon. Who knows?

    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 7, 2014
  12. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    Accreditation is a minimum standard. Anyone looking to pursue higher education should use accreditation status as the first block in the GO/NO-GO decision process and then do further research from there. It should not be the deciding factor alone.

    If an institution cannot meet the minimum standard, why would anyone consider spending their hard earned money and time there to earn a credential that will always have to be defended and justified in the eyes of those who know anything about accreditation?
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards Member

    I agree these are wise words.
  14. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    There are those who don't care what others think -- and that's OK, as long as they don't attempt fraudulent use of the "credential."

    Back in the day, unaccredited didn't always mean "bad" (though it did, more often than not) and there were circumstances in which an unaccredited degree might have suited some people's needs. I'd say most of those circumstances of old no longer apply -- especially monetary considerations, with today's less-expensive routes to a recognized degree.

    Schools like Nations, that issue solely religious degrees, are exempt in 20-odd states from accreditation requirements. Despite this provision, most of the better religious schools have achieved recognized accreditation, some RA, some NA - DETC, or the CHEA-recognized "Faith-Based" National Accreditors, e.g. TRACS.

    These days, Truckie, I'd have to agree with you pretty much completely.

  15. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    Thanks Johann. I realize that some people have unique situations and motivations that make accreditation a non-issue. Unaccredited is not "bad", but with the numerous options out there and even specialized accreditations for institutions that do not meet the NA threshold some form of accreditation should be the minimum that anyone pursuing education should require in their decision criteria. I still maintain that for the vast majority of people RA should be the minimum criteria for a degree given the number of options out there (not an RA v. NA debate prompt).

    Even when that benchmark has been met, it is imperative that people do additional research on their choices. How many people out there have plunked down hard earned cash for a degree that was accredited, but later turned out to be a poor choice?

    Even though Nations is exempted, they apparently realized the value of the process at some point in time.
  16. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I think people know where I stand regarding accreditation, both recognized vs. unrecognized and the acceptance of different forms of recognized accreditation. Still, there are exceptions. There are some very good unaccredited schools in California, many who've been operating for decades. And I firmly believe a degree from a good, unaccredited school can boost some careers, especially protean ones.

    Generalizations are fine, but absolutes are almost always wrong.
  17. AdjunctInstructor

    AdjunctInstructor New Member

    More assumptions on your part. You know nothing of what transpired so rant on all you want. You continue to make assumptions and claim you do not make assumptions. However, I do realize you think you know everything but I am sorry your off base. learn the facts before you attack people as inept and incompetent administrators and educators who cares if you knew the regulatory issues when you ran a business that has nothing to to with the state authorization issues online schools and all schools face. NU has always had a presence and office in Louisiana and Tennessee and under older Tennessee authorization agreements was allowed to do that and just as the site visit took place state authorities wanted to revisit those agreements in light of the new DOE rules. This my last time trying to reason with you and stop attacking people and processes that you really know nothing or little about. In fact it is a waste of my time to respond to you. I think you like the attention on this forum and relish attacking. I am not playing your game any longer. Hopefully you find another school to attack perhaps that will occupy you. :wavey:
  18. truckie270

    truckie270 New Member

    I indicated that those who know anything about accreditation understand the issues involved with a school who has tried to meet the accreditation standard and cannot. I fully realize that there are institutions that have for whatever reason not chosen to pursue the accreditation path and have produced successful graduates.

    I don't want to circle-talk with you on this as I agree about the LIMITED instances where unaccredited degrees can provide utility. However, in my view, when one of these unaccredited entities decides to cross-over to the world of accreditation and cannot meet the minimum standard it should lose the ability to lump itself in with unaccredited schools who have done well and not pursued the process.
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 7, 2014
  19. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Thanks, I'm done now. Is it really a rant, when one observes paragraph and sentence structure? You, on the other hand... :smile:

  20. Randell1234

    Randell1234 Moderator

    Personal attacks need to stop now. This is a first and only warning. Thanks.

Share This Page