But what if there was an internationally accredited program that is both flexible and affordable?

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Kriya shukla, Feb 2, 2018.

Loading...
  1. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator

    I want the world to be a better place. And when I use the term "better" what I mean is that I want it to be much closer to the way that I want, regardless of what anyone else thinks. Now please be clear about this next part. I do not want to play any role in this change. I do not want to make any effort at all. I want everyone else to do all the work. Although I will continue to complain if your efforts are not up to my standards. That is all. Carry on.
     
    heirophant likes this.
  2. heirophant

    heirophant Well-Known Member

    That's hyperbole. Let's use this thread as a concrete example. A year ago, somebody posted something about "Unicaf University", its programs and its "international accreditation". None of the posts responding to that initial post gave the thing any kind of blanket endorsement. At worst, they just suggested that it merits further investigation.

    Then Raphael revived the thread last week. He said that he's enrolled in some program offered by (or validated by, or something) the University of South Wales, through a Unicaf scholarship. He then asked if USW or University of the People would be a better choice.

    Then you appeared in post #20, announced: "Save a little money, get student loans, etc., and go to a regionally accredited US program." You ignored the likelihood that Raphael isn't located in the United States, and you ignored the fact that the University of South Wales is a British University, with recognitions in the UK that are generally considered equivalent to regional accreditation here in the United States (a view that generally speaking is shared internationally).

    https://www.southwales.ac.uk/

    https://unicaf.southwales.ac.uk/

    Perhaps you should start by defining what you mean by "NA". It's a pretty nebulous term that takes in a lot of territory. There are many non-RA accreditors out there (even if we restrict ourselves to the institutional accreditors, since most non-RA accreditors are programmatic accreditors) and the schools that they accredit range from marginal to some of the most prestigious research institutions in the world.

    Sure, but that's a little circular, isn't it? You are already assuming the "very limited utility" part. Obvously, if a program doesn't serve a student's needs, then it's not a good choice.

    And "career options aside" is a huge caveat. Isn't that a big part of why many people enroll in degree programs? If prospective employers recognize a program and are good with it, then the "very limited utility" premise seemingly collapses.

    I'm not convinced that the quality of instruction is really a function of accreditation. It's more a matter of who the teachers are (and with DL, delivery medium).

    Regional accreditation's tougher standards don't really address educational effectiveness very directly. There aren't output measures such as exit exams that all RA graduates must pass. Instead, the accreditors emphasize inputs, like ensuring that teachers are qualified, that syllabi are reasonably credible, and so on. (They give schools lots of academic freedom on that.) But most of the regional accreditors' attention is directed to finances and administrative procedures. RA schools need to have robust financing, many grievance procedures and no end of committees and reports. How much that actually contributes to educational outputs and to student experience is a controversial question in the higher education world.

    I wrote: "It's probably helpful for prospective students to hear about the many considerations that might go into a choice of program. Accreditation is just one of them, and sometimes (as with me) not the most important one."

    For me personally? I'd like to see that argument.

    Speaking more generally, I think that we can easily lead prospective students astray if we recommend an RA program just because it's RA, even if a prospective student can't afford it, can't get past the admissions requirements, even if the program doesn't address that student's subject in a way that's relevant to the student's interests and needs, and even if that student's employers are perfectly good with a non-RA alternative for promotional purposes or whatever. And when we do as you did in post #20 and start lumping foreign universities in with "NA" and suggesting that they be avoided, then we may have gone completely off the rails.

    And you do???

    Look, these are prospective university students, not pre-school kids. Most of them seem to be interested in graduate degrees, so they already have university degrees under their belts. Nobody else is better positioned to make those choices for them than they are themselves. So they are quite capable of listening to multiple viewpoints, absorbing the facts and making their own decisions We don't need to condescend to them, offering up misleading half-truths in hopes of preventing the little darlings from making choices that certain of our members don't agree with.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2019
  3. dlbb

    dlbb Active Member

    Heirophant,
    See previous posts for refutations to the arguments you raise. The other points you raise I will let others address as the over all substance of what I have expressed remains unchallenged.

    Kizmet,
    I will consider it, but would much prefer others take up the mantle. I understand you do not wish to, but there are others here who share these opinions and would be better suited for that. They would be more likely to respond to any naysayers.
     

Share This Page