California Coast University Credit Transfer

I think it's a mistake to say that we don't "know" something simply because there hasn't been published research to support it. I think there is evidence that indicates that NA degrees are at least somewhat more accepted than they were 20 years ago. As LA said, there's the evidence related to programmatic accreditation. Acceptance of NA credit transfer by more RA schools seems to have increased. We've also seen some people with NA Bachelors degrees getting into RA grad schools. The two may not be on equal footing at this point but it seems clear that the gap has narrowed. But what is it that has changed? What specifically is different that these changes have occurred? My guess is that a large part of it is that people's attitudes toward online education has changed. Twenty years ago getting a DL degree was more than a little weird and people scoured the world looking for specific degree programs only to discover that they didn't exist. People worried endlessly that it wouldn't say "online" on the diploma because they were concerned about stigma. Now, there are thousands of degree programs in the US and around the world and it's hard to find a subject area that can't be studied online. Once upon a time DL degrees were build almost exclusively for mid-career professionals but now we seen a huge upswing in enrollments for people coming right out of high school. The surge in popularity is related to a number of factors, most of them well known to us but it has brought with it a sense of familiarity with the general concepts of online learning and this is translating into a much larger degree of "OK-ness" about DL that is evident in many ways, including the wider acceptance of DEAC and other NA degree programs. I believe that this is a trend that will continue and at some point we may wonder whether there is an actual need for DEAC in the accreditation world and it may become subsumed by the regional accreditors.

 

Berkeley is a state university.

 

I was incomplete with my thought. I meant as opposed to non-distance learning issues like other NA and programmatic accreditation. When we talk about "NA vs. RA," we're almost always talking about "DEAC vs. RA." That's all.

 

Yup.

 

"I think there is evidence that...."

"...seems to have increased."

"...my guess is..."

This is why a research-based re-visit of this question would be valuable, and why speculating about it is not. Is there evidence to indicate things have improved? I guess so, but it's hard to say and even harder to describe to what extent this is so.

(My guess is that things have improved, too.)

Again, anecdotes. But was the magnitude of the actual gap? And to whom might it apply? We simply do not know, which is why I hesitate to recommend attending a DEAC-accredited school as a general rule (while also accepting that it may be perfectly fine for some people in some situations).

I've felt that since...always. There has never been any unique ground covered by DEAC that was not covered by the RAs (with degree-granting institutions). None. That has contributed to its second-class image; there's no need for it. I've said for years that DEAC ought to pay attention to its history in distance learning and acknowledge that this aspect no longer makes a school unique. Instead, it should become a programmatic accreditor of distance learning programs within RA schools. But that would leave a great number of DEAC-accredited schools out in the cold because they cannot obtain RA. Now, what message does that send?

 

Yeah, you're right. It's all anecdotal. But the thing is that no one is going to do the research you're proposing. It isn't going to happen. And so while we all wait for that bus (it isn't coming) we still have to deal with real life situations, decisions, etc. So people will make the best decision they can with the information that is available. Mostly, that consists of anecdotal evidence as, sadly, most people have not read your dissertation.

I think you may have fallen victim to your own logic here because I don't think there's any published data to support the idea that DEAC accredited schools are incapable of obtaining RA status. As far as I know, most have not even tried.

 

Right after publication, it was purchased by a known troll and then downloaded 63 times before I found out and cut off electronic sales. So someone read it.

I've made it available online for years to anyone. It still is.

It could happen again, if someone was interested enough. I'm not

BTW, the lesser acceptance of degrees from then-DETC accredited schools was not the most interesting finding. Instead, it was the field of HR didn't know about the distinctions between various forms of institutional recognition and that they didn't really care. That's why the experiment I did was so interesting--the numbers all moved significantly in the direction you'd expect once brief descriptions were provided. A little bit of knowledge went a long way--but they didn't know there was something to know.

I'm an SPHR and have been for years. They (we) still don't know and don't care.

I'm not a victim of anything, especially my own logic.

My opinion is based on the assumption that regional accreditation is more desirable than DEAC accreditation. I still believe that to be true. For many, many years, no school had gone from DEAC to RA. (A few pursued both simultaneously, with DEAC always coming through faster.) Since, several schools have gone on to regional accreditation and dropped DEAC accreditation. None have dropped RA in favor of DEAC accreditation. So yeah, I think the pecking order still exists.

What would be illogical is the idea that a school would, all things being equal, prefer DEAC accreditation over RA.

 

In the end your opinion differs from mine very little. I also believe that RA degrees have more utility. I've said it many times. However, I think there's reason to believe the gap has narrowed in the last 20 years and I don't feel that I need a published dissertation to believe that's so.

 

I think we concur completely. I would add that in order to understand the magnitude of the gap, and perhaps nuances within it, more current research is needed. In 2001 John Bear surveyed college admissions officials and I conducted an experiment with HR professionals in 2003. One can imagine that a lot has changed and (likely) for the better (from a DEAC perspective, anyway). But we don't really know, and we definitely don't know if the differences remaining even matter anymore.