CCU to offer professional doctoral degrees the first quarter of 2007.

Re: Zing

Me again,

Your comments above hold true at the current time. However, it is conceivable that in the future this situation MAY change due to the recent accreditation of DETC doctorates by CHEA in a number of academic disciplines! The accreditation of DETC doctorates places DETC in a new playing field. In the future, we may have a better idea how viable these degrees actually are in terms of their utilizability within the context of myriad work, academic and licensure situations.

 

Re: Re: Zing

Hi Simon, please don't feed the troll... This person is a known shill and troll who uses multiple login accounts. As Smokey the Bear might say, "Only YOU can prevent troll fires."

Dave

 

Re: Seriously?

I am very surprised that somebody with your credentials would exhibit such narrow thinking. I always thought that part of being a physiology professional was the ability to avoid stereotyping, generalizations, assumptions, and jumping into conclusions, all of which you have done in the above posts.

Intellectual wealth comes to those who are forward thinkers, those who understand the limitations of linear thinking or the “thinking inside the box” mentality.

As a professional you should know that teaching and learning is very dynamic. There are many ways to deliver knowledge, and people have many different learning styles. Suggesting that one or few delivery methods are superior to others shows a bias and/or lack of understanding of the dynamics involved.

As someone else in this thread already said, if that is the caliber of knowledge and understanding obtained at your preferred accrediting schools, well, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Pepe

 

Re: Re: Zing

While it is true that DETC accreditation originated with trade school type programs, they have been acfcrediting academic programs for quite some time now.

 

Re: Re: Re: Zing

Very true Ted!


Abner

 

Re: Re: Zing

I seriosly doubt that there is any regulation where the regional accrediting agencies explicitly say, "Nationally accredited doctorate holders are hereby forbidden from teaching at regionally accredited institutions." If you think about it, why would we even need such a regulation yet? Since DETC doctorates have just now been approved, I think it is safe to say that there are no DETC doctorate holders as yet. My guess is that, if a bias against DETC doctorates for purposes of hiring for professorates does become obvious in a few years when we have some DETC doctoral graduates out there in the job market, it will likely be due to the personal preferences of the department chairs. Such as it is, we are currently seeing a bias against regionally accredited distance learning doctoral graduates and I doubt that even this will go away at least until a new generation of department chairs arises ... one which had a choice between either giving up any possibility of a life for five to seven years for a bricks & mortar doctorate or else a regionally accredited distance learning doctorate. Once that bias fades away, some years down the road, the bias against DETC doctorates may too fade ... with the rising of another new generation of department chairs for whom DETC doctorates had been one of a range of options available to them. So, maybe in about 40 years.

 

Forward thinking meet current realities

Actually, mundo, in keeping with the spirit of learning, I have sought out and reviewed content from the sources I have mentioned. I am not -- as others seem to favor -- simply spouting self-inspired rhetoric.

Fair point ... and what I have been trying to communicate (until others chose to focus on my saying it and not what is being said) is that even coming from an unconventional but RA program, the system at many levels is not welcoming to people from my university.

As does cherry-picking hot-button pieces from posts and ignoring the whole message.

Bottom line -- why does accreditation exist? Why did it ever evolve?

Perhaps I was mistaken in my belief that the underlying philosophy of this forum was to forward the perpetuation of legitimate education. Yes, there are many learning modalities, but it was decided that there do need to be some parameters for the delivery of education to assure some measure of quality. If asking questions about a modality's ability to rise to that level of quality is too "linear" perhaps it is time to remove the requirement of accreditation all together.

Or is it just that some people are so threatened by someone simply asking a question that the only response is to flame the questioner?

Am I to conclude that a majority of people here would be comfortable seeking services from people who claim a professional/academic credential no matter its source? If we really are going "outside of the box," why not return to the era of Lincoln and just let everyone self educate and claim whatever credential they feel appropriate?

If, in reality, the forum chooses to advocate a "diploma by any means" mentality, why is it here? There are plenty of mills out there ready and willing to take your money.

 

Re: Forward thinking meet current realities

Why does accreditation exist? Perhaps to indicate whether the institution being accredited is any darn good. Why did it ever evolve? Perhaps the better question is: "Has accreditation evolved and, if so, how and in what direction?" But, normally, if something has evolved, it is an attempt to improve on what has gone before.

 

Re: Re: CCU to offer professional doctoral degrees the first quarter of 2007.

It might be even more in teresting if you could post links to DETC's official standards for doctoral programs and the RAs' official standards for doctoral programs.

 

Re: Re: Re: CCU to offer professional doctoral degrees the first quarter of 2007.

Hi Ted,

You're giving me too much credit... I don't know all the written differences between the respective doctoral programs, if any, and don't have time to research/analyze the links today; I'm pushing out stuff to take tomorrow off for my 25th anniversary. I suspect most of the differences are actually in admissions policies and institutional differences, such as GMAT scores and financial wherewithal. The composition of the doctoral committees and members' expertise in the topics are enormous variables from one doctoral student to the next, and perhaps this will be the real difference between DETC and RA doctoral programs. Dunno.

Dave

 

Re: Forward thinking meet current realities

I must be missing something here. I thought we were talking about accredited degrees all along. Were we not?

The parameters for delivering quality education do exist. That is the job of the many accrediting agencies including the DETC.

In terms of effectiveness and real life quality, it is too early to tell. The DETC doctoral programs are new and we must avoid prejudice. With time, we will see if graduates of these programs have the success and acceptance in the marketplace as those of similar programs accredited by other agencies.

Pepe

 

I would agree that the Psy.D's purpose is to train psychologist who provide clinical services -not teach or do research in general. If you could not get licensed as a Psychologist then I don't see it's utility. About half of psychologists do not engage in clinical or counseling work - but a Ph.D is the usual route, not the Psy.D.
I can imagine schools as American Pacific University being interested in offering professional doctorates in areas like Hypnotherapy where licensing is not required and DETC accreditation would give the degree some credibility now lacking.
(the DCH-Doctor of Clinical Hypnotherapy)
Nursing has not really accepted the DETC accredited nursing degrees now available and nurses with these degrees cannot obtain certification in some nursing specialties (if not RA)
Aspen, which is DETC is working toward CCNE (American Association of Colleges of Nursing )accreditation because without it it's degree will have limited utility. (even RA degrees with CCNE or NLN have less utility)
I'd like the idea of DETC doctorates if they were research based. We always have posts praising U of South Africa's doctoral route. These are degrees by research with no residency or coursework -done by dissertation. Why wouldn't this be acceptable to organizations as The APA if there were DETC accredited supervised research doctorates?

 

For clinicians with master degrees and state licensure in Psychiatric Social Work or Mental Health Counseling who are clinically oriented with little interest in doctoral level research, the DETC Psy.D may offer a viable conduit to attain an advanced academic credential. Such clinicians have already met state criteria for licensure, are already deemed competent to provide clinical interventions and treatment and are seeking a doctorate that demonstrates their advanced knowledged based competencies.

There is absolutely nothing deceptive, misrepresentative or unethical in doing so as long as the clinician does not represent him/herself in their marketing material as a licensed Psychologist. In addition as part of an ongoing verbal and written informed consent with clients as long as the clinician clearly delineates their scope of expertise, the exact nature of their professional title and academic degrees and certifications, the exact nature of the services they offer (and those they don't), there is absolutely no basis for any allegations of misleading prospective clients.

It is important to keep in mind that the attainment of doctoral degrees in Psychology or Human Services (with specializations in professional Counseling and Social Work) in order to advance one's educational and professional status and to enhance one's marketing potential is not a novel concept. For a number of years RA distance learning schools such as Walden, Argosy and Capella and more recently NCU have been offering doctoral degrees in Ge neral Psychology (Walden annd NCU), Counseling Psychology (Ed.D-Argosy University), Human services (Capella- with specializations in Professional Counseling, now termed "Counseling Studies) for this very purpose. None of these programs had a practicum or internship requirement either and yet were and are currently sought after doctorates by individuals in academia and clinical practice for myriad professional, employment, marketing and/or promotional opportunities.

 

Oh really?

This is a slippery slope into gray area and the OP knows it.
Ask the average consumer of mental health to distinquish between a psychiatrist and psychologist and there remains a pervasive confusion.
Then ask about the difference between a counselor and psychologist.
Now insert the counselor being called "doctor."

Do you really think the unlicensed PsyD isn't going to put Dr. John Smith, LCPC on business cards and signage?
Ask 10 people on the street what that means and you'll get 10 different answers.

While not making reference to oneself as psychologist technically abides the letter of the law, the spirit of the law is being pretty obviously trampled.

And, once again, the OP knows that these programs are clearly labeled as "non-license track." There are many other reasons for a psych PhD (research, teaching, consulting). The PsyD, on the other hand, was developed to be a practice degree .. to specifically focus on providing mental health services.

To use such a degree to be called "doctor" while operating under a Master's license will likely be grounds for prosecution of practicing psychology without a license.

 

I must disagree with Simon (respectfully of course) Would a Licensed Social Worker or Counselor get a Doctor of Nursing Science if availible and they couldn't practice nursing? One must see that although similiar in some functions Counseling and Social work are distinct professions in themselves. Mental health Counseling is a different profession than Counseling Psychology.
I agree the knowledge learned in a Psy.D program would be useful to these professions but confusing to the client. Psychologists do psychological testing. Licensed Social Workers don't.
Counselors can do testing but do not treat the more severe pathology that a psychologist would -so as a rule most counselors do not do projective tests as the Rorschach. If he has a Psy.D as a title this can confuse others.
So there may not be anything ethically wrong with it but it may confuse the client and other mental health professionals.
One can be a psychologist in a non-clinical area of psychology with a Ph.D or ED.D but a Psy.D is usually reserved for Licensed psychologists.
If one is a Licensed Social worker I suggest they obtain a D.S.W. If a licensed mental health counelor I'd suggest a ED.D or Ph.D in Counseling.

 

Why the dance?

And you know there is a sharp distincition in perceptions of quality and practical utility of NA and RA accreditation.
Please don't insult everyone by suggesting this doesn't exist.

Perhaps, but "must avoid prejudice"? What is the point of obtaining experience and education if one is then prohibited from employing the acquired skills in making an informed judgment?

We're just supposed to all join hands, sing Kumbaya, and believe those who would take advantage of this new (and huge!) revenue stream represtented by DETC doctorates will all "do the right thing"?

Yes, there very well may be some legitimate programs who will put forth due diligence and produce quality programs that just happen to follow a different modality.

But one has to be very suspicious when DETC has not even been granted doctoral oversight authority yet (it is only a recommendation at this point), yet several DETC programs are already planning to implement professional doctorates in the first quarter of 2007? Are we to believe they all have had well designed programs waiting for this day to come? Or is it more likely they are looking to jump into a new profit stream with little concern for the quality of their programs or the marketability of the subsequent degrees?

I thought part of this forum was to help people considering continuing their education through alternate means evaluate the options? Well, my experiences in education have taught me that this is an advance that needs to be evaluated very carefully before just signing off!

 

Re: Oh really?

The only time I can guarantee non-confusion between a M.D. and a Ph.D., or a PysD for that matter, when I hear someone referred to as Dr. Jones is if I see the letters after the person's name. The title "Doctor" is going to always be confusing based on your argument. Hence, the post-name designation seems the only way to ensure there is no confusion.

While your point is taken there is certainly more to the issue than the distinction between a counselor and the doctor in the field of mental health.

On this forum alone there is a significant number of "doctors". Is there a doctor in the house?

 

I wasted a precious minute of my life reading your post -- a precious minute that is forever lost.

You are an oxygen thief.

 

Re: Why the dance?

I don't know about whether the programs are well-designed but any of these California State Approved DL schools (from memory) that have or had doctoral programs could conceivably attempt DETC accreditation now:

California Coast University (CCU)
California Pacific University (CPU)
California University of Business and Technology (CUBT)
Newport University (?)
Ryokan College
Southern California University of Professional Studies (SCUPS)

There are probably at least a dozen more that could attempt DETC doctoral accreditation but escape my memory.

Yes, of course, these are for profit schools that might want to capitalize on all their past work.

Dave

 

Re: Re: Re: Zing

Huh?