Can a State Approved Degree be Evaluated as equivelant to RA or NA by a Agency?

This... this hypothetical thing I'm proffering, here... isn't an attempt to "accredit" via the back door. This is one person saying, in effect:

• "Hey! You... over there... yeah, you... the NACES member evaluator. Didn't you just declare a BA in Underwater Basketweaving from East-Nowhereistan to be equivalent to a similarly-titled BA from virtually any regionally-accredited university in the U.S.? Cool! Listen, I just graduated from Suchandsuch University -- a 30-year-old unaccredited degree-granting institution, licensed by the State of California and with a reputation for rigor that everyone agrees is impressive. Could you please evaluate my degree in basically the same way that you did that other one and declare it on-par with a similarly-titled degree from any regionally-accredited U.S. school, too?"

At the end of said evaluation, that one particular degree, owned by that one particular person -- and only that one particular degree, owned only by the one particular person -- will be declared either fit or unfit for presentation by that one particular person as a valid educational credential right alongside any other regionally-accredited degree presented by anyone else. No programs. Just one individual and his one individual degree. Paid for out of said individual's pocket. For his/her personal use and benefit only. Others like him/her can go negotiate their own deals.

[/b]We're not talking about that, here. Every NACES evaluator knows who the diploma mills are -- and how to recognize any new ones that popped-up since the last time they reviewed the list. I'm talking about degrees from clearly substantial albeit unaccredited institutions that actually exist, that have reputations that are easily observable and verifiable, etc. I'm talking about someone with a degree from one of those places going to a NACES member evaluator and saying, "If it works for a foreign degree, why couldn't it work for one from a college you know is legit, but that is also, for whatever reason, unaccredited?"




Thanks for understanding my question Des Elms, Now, to summarize what I am asking..., Could a reputable agency evaluate a STATE APPROVED degree to identify if its equivelant to a RA program? What outside agency would be best approached to TEST this possiblity?

 

As I mentioned, the closest thing to what you ask for, that I know of, is the ODA. If you live in Oregon they will evaluate the degree for $250, IIRC. If you don't live in Oregon and you own an unaccredited school or perhaps you might want to use your degree in Oregon (even though you don't live there) then, I think they will do the evaluation for the same fee.

http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html

 

I wrote:

You don't want your process confused with accreditation, but its purpose is to declare non-accredited degree programs equivalent to accredited ones? That needs explanation.

Diplomas certify that a graduate's educational experiences and required assessments met the standard appropriate for that degree. Diplomas report that a process has been completed. The issue with non-accredited schools is determining the credibility and integrity of that academic process their particular cases.

If we aren't interested in the credibility of academic programs, then why are we interested in academic diplomas and what is it that we think that they are telling us?

Unfortunately, that seems to be what the result of your proposal would be, even if it's not your intention.

That's explicit in your saying that the result of your process would be some expert evaluation that a non-accredited degree is equivalent to an accredited one. We have already seen schools like SRU advertising that credential evaluators have declared that their degrees are RA-equivalent. The obvious implication is that SRU produces RA-equivalent degrees and is therefore RA-equivalent.

I'm not as confident that degree-mills, let alone the far more ambiguous substandard schools, are easy to spot from afar, based only on a superficial examination of their published literature.

There seems to be some circularity with this. We have a questioned degree and want credible reasons to consider it RA-equivalent. If we simply assume that the process that generated the degree is substantial, then we are merely producing a conclusion that we originally stuffed in as a premise. I would argue that the substantiality of the process is precisely what's in question here. It can't just be assumed.

I have no problem with endorsements.

I've made many posts (more than anyone else who posts to Degreeinfo) about non-accredited schools that I happen to like and about my reasons for liking them. I consider some of them to not only be very good, but to even be world leaders at what they do.

Part of what makes me form positive impressions of particular schools are positive opinions from parties that I respect. I look for the opinions of professional associations, solid universities, respected colleagues, government agencies, grant and award committees, journal editorial boards, and the like.

I suppose that I could add your credential evaluators to that mix, if I thought that their evaluation procedures were both credible and relevant to the question at hand.

The problem I have is the suggestion that your evaluators can declare degrees, and by implication the programs that granted them, to be RA-equivalent. I'm troubled by the idea that this evaluation could be institutionalized, as opposed to being a matter of personal opinion. And I'm put off by the implicit suggestion that the work that the accreditors do, all of their studies and site visits, is really unnecessary when deciding questions of RA-equivalence.

That ultimately sounds like a covert call to redefine what "RA equivalence" means, to appropriate some of the public respect for the phrase while bypassing those annoying accreditors themselves.

 

And they have to base their evaluation on what, exactly? The "reputation" is too vague a criteria IMHO. In the case of a degree from East-Nowhereistan, the evaluator pulls some huge book that basicaly says that "East-Nowhereistan has a higher education system overseen by the Ministry of Education that is known to generally do its job", then look up the school name on the authoritative list of East-Nowhereistanian schools, then figures out than the degree of "Big All-Knowing Shaman" takes five years to earn and is generally similar in content to B. Sc. in vedic flying from RA university, then looks if the documents appear genuine and unaltered (or contacts East-Nowhereistanian college's registrar). What process will the imaginary evaluator employ in case of a CA-approved school? "We have heard generally good things about the school from some guy, and the diploma looks nice"?

 

JNelson467,

See what happens when you fiddle with the quote vB code? In the quoted part of Stanislav's post, my words are being attributed to you because of the weird way you quoted me four posts back.

Everyone, please, if we're gonna' keep all this straight, we gotta' be careful about such things.

 

Sorry for my poor quote use. Please disregard. Sorry DesElms

My apologies for the misuse of the " quote " function on part of DesElms post. Please disregard.

I am still awaiting some responses of MY feelings and ideology from what I posted previously. I want to hear some feedback on this: Please read

The point that I am trying to make, and again, I am in no way seeking to open up a can of never-ending whoopy here or name schools, but I must say that there are a few State approved schools that are, in my opinion, legitimate and mean well. Curriculum is thought out, measurable and a student may receive more direct attention and personal direction than through a BIG NAME university who has chosen to get into the Distance learning arena, because, after all, It's a BIG money maker and BIG business!!

I do feel that there are a few reasons why a University that may have been around a while and has a modest reputation in a particular area of expertise may choose to not seek a NA or RA accreditation. Do I agree with their motives? Probably not, but I do understand from one perspective.

If a school, lets say, tries to keep its number of enrolled students to a limit so that the entire student body will have adequate and a positive personal experience due to keeping the university at a proper size and LOW tuition costs, then I can understand their motives. Kind of like the public schools where you hear of a teacher in kindergarten teaching 35 students...GET REAL...that's a overkill and I would pull my hair out too.

What I am referring to is if a school is satisfactory with the enrollment and inquiries into the schools program, they seek to keep tuition costs low and work to keep the # of enrolled students to a satisfactory range to provide better teacher/student relationships; then WHY would they seek to gain a accreditation that will require possibly a additional staff member just to maintain Federal and Student loans that are required to ALL students when holding a RA or NA accredited status, when the school is satisfied with it's capture rate or student inquiries?

We all know that basic business sense tells us that to price a product or service, one tends to increase cost until you see a resistence from the potential market or consumer. This has always been about money and it always will be.

If I operated a school and chose to take a accreditation, in addition to being approved and evaluated by a state ( a part of the United States ), I would also raise my tuition until I found a resistence point because I KNOW that Students who can obtain a financial aid loan are more apt to pay alot more in tuition costs because they can defer and get low interest loans..pay for it for the rest of his or her life if so desired.

Again, I firmly believe that the intentions of accrediting bodies are to assist in securing a standard of equivelancy for educational programs and to prevent DEGREE MILLS from wrongfully awarding a degree for little to no work completed. please understand that I agree and believe in Regional and national accreditation and their initiatives and objectives.

My apologies for my dissertation, but I want to go back to my original question

If one has a degree from a State approved University and feels that although he or she does not understand why a school would not want to gain accreditation for whatever reason ( My idea being that they are satisfied with # of enrollies and do not want to mess with a additional body to also please, student loans, higher tuitions which now place them in the mix with all other schools in terms tuition price etc. and MORE competition). Can a individual seek a private agency to have his or her degree program evaluated for legitimacy of being equivelant to a RA or NA approved institution? mainly because they do not want to be seen as ILLEGAL in Mr. Contreras's or Oregon's eyes as being listed as a DIPLOMA MILL because of a lack of accreditation.

 

Gregg DesElms,

The problem that I have with your proposal is that it seems to assume that academic rigor is a given. When a foreign degree is evaluated, it is basically assumed that sufficient academic rigor was applied during each course. The weak point for unaccredited schools is that academic rigor is generally an unknown. That is because a basic purpose of accreditation is to ensure academic rigor and unaccredited schools have not been evaluated. If you can't trust the academic rigor of the school then how can you possibly evaluate a single degree without studying all the tests and assignments from each class the student took at the unaccredited school?

 

Oh, boy. This thread pushed everyones' buttons, I guess.

The real problem with this discussion is that no one seems to be asking the real question. "Equivalent for WHAT and to WHOM?"

Every school has the right to accept, or not accept, any credits (or degrees) it likes, whether from an unaccredited institution or Harvard University. So there CAN BE NO authority that "declares" equivalency.

The same thing goes for licensing authorities. New Hampshire might allow an NCU grad to take its EIT exam but that surely doesn't mean New Mexico will, or even California, if yu want the truth.

A "degree" is not an "ordination". It is not proof to the world that the holder is acceptable for any particular purpose.

Dr. Bear had it right (as always): Make sure that your degree will meet your foreseeable needs, whatever they may be. There are few guarantees.

Accreditation gives the closest thing to a guarantee. That's all.

 

cast my lot

Des Elms:

I agree with your hypothesis.

After reading so much about the celebrity "John Bear"; I ordered the book for BEARS 15th edition.

I was very surprised after having read about the way Kennedy Western is classified as a diploma mill on these boards, that Dr. Bear has KW listed as not exactly being a bad school, just not accredited.

I was also surprised to see no mention of the other university, St. Regis as being a diploma mill either.

Accreditation has a value in the hands of the "holder". To me, accreditation is very "subjective" in nature and is being mishandled. Every school should have the oportunity without being a financial impossibility to apply for Region Accreditation.

My next question is who evaluated the accreditor and shall continue to do so? I do not think that private enterprise should be in charge of granting a "seal of quality" to education, this is a Government responsability!

If a state has a defined set of parameters for allowing a University to operate; why should the merits of a Degree be taken away from the person who worked to obtain it? Why should the "my degree is R.A.", yours is not; be thrown in the face of degree seekers and holders alike. This has become like comparing "rolex" watches.

Mr. Alan Contreras seemed to imply that society has become infected with "DEGREE MANIA". Seems like humans no longer are valued for there word or hard work; the parchment with seals has replaced common sense and disernment.

Do you give your degree personality or does your degree give it to you?

 

Re: cast my lot

SRU most certainly is listed as a degree mill, page 279-280.

Most of the institutions in the "Other" and "Miscellaneous" are also degree mills, IMHO. In other places in the book, many of the signs of a degree mill are explained, e.g., fleeing from one jurisdiction to another, not enrolling "victims" that live in the same jurisdiction as where they operate, etc.. In the description of KWU all of this signs of being a degree mill are enumerated. The book also explains that these diploma mill con-artists are prone to nuisance law suits so that not all degree mills can be placed in the degree mill chapter, e.g., KWU suit filed against Oregon.

 

humble

Bill:

You have spoken the correct expression; "in your humble opinion." But John Bear is the expert.

I missed the SRU AND yes you are right! Its on the bottom right hand corner.

 

Re: humble

Absolutely, John is the expert. Read the expert's signals that are documented in the book then, read the description of KWU that the expert wrote.