Chi Institute of Traditional Chinese Veterinary Medicine

This school has applied for DEAC accreditation. I'm really kind of hoping they get it only because I'm tired of seeing MBA programs and TESL degrees.

 

acupuncture for my goldfish?

 

Veterinary medicine by distance learning?

What would a graduate do with a degree from this thing? It pretty obviously wouldn't qualify anyone for a veterinary medicine license.

Even if a graduate could somehow avoid the licensing laws, is there really a market (in the US anyway) for "traditional Chinese veterinary medicine"?

Here's their website

http://www.tcvm.com/

Apparently at the present time they are mostly offering continuing education classes to conventionally educated licensed veterinarians.

 

The only people who can legally provide veterinary acupuncture, in Florida at least, are veterinarians. Aside from their CE work, their website shows a Masters program which, they note, does not qualify you to become a veterinarian. My guess is that it would be an add-on degree for vets who decide to diversify their revenue stream with quackery.

Naturally, there is no reason a vet would NEED a Masters in Veterinary Acupuncture, but nobody needs acupuncture, so why not?

My prediction is that, if accredited (and perhaps even if not), their Masters could find customers among those who want alternative health credentials but wish to operate in the grey areas around current licensing laws. Figure, Naturopaths are only licensed in a minority of U.S. states and yet they practice all over the place, carefully straddling that line between "health coaching" and practicing medicine without a license. Yet students spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on those degrees. Chiropractors spend medical school level tuition on a degree that only entitles them to start a clinic or work for another chiropractor. Very few actual hospitals employ chiros and their relationship with insurance is a bit less generous than MD/DOs.

I am just very amused by this prospect. Like I said, it's just fun because it's different. I am always disappointed when I see candidate schools offering the same nonsense; MBAs, teaching degrees, career diplomas in the same fields etc.

 

I'll just leave this here...

 

Maybe acupuncture for blowfish ....ssss ...BAM!

Seriously, I noted that George Brown College - Distance Education Division was on the DEAC list. This is part of a public College of Applied Arts & Technology (used to be called Community Colleges) here. The distance school has an excellent reputation in teaching vocational areas - you can get certs by distance in many fields - from Electronics Technician to Linux Administration, Construction Project Management ... list here: https://coned.georgebrown.ca/courses-and-certificates/distance-education-certificates/ I notice now the instruction portion comes on a USB drive - testing etc. is online.

I wonder if George Brown's distance division is going DEAC because they intend to roll out degree programs for US students? I remember a few years ago, an American 2-year College licensed George Brown's Electronics Technician course, wrapped it in Gen. Ed requirements and successfully marketed the combo as a (RA) Associate degree. If George Brown can become DEAC-accredited and offer their excellent existing courses, expanded to degree format -- now that'll be a huge deal!!

I wish them every success!

 

I noticed George Brown as well and spent some time perusing their offerings. I'm glad to hear they have a good reputation. I suspect the DEAC accreditation is, indeed, for a push for US students. Though, I'm not sure why they would really need it.

13 modules, $90 per module plus $400 in technology fees. We're at just shy of $1,600 Canadian/ I'm looking at the Robotics Technician certificate for this example as it appears one of the more technical programs and one that is quite different from the usual career offerings (medical transcription, administrative assistant etc). To me, this puts them in competition with schools like Penn Foster. I can't imagine that federal financial aid is their goal. One thing George Brown has going for it is that it is a foreign school in a place where the accreditation scheme makes a bit more sense than the U.S., IMO. People can quibble over whether PF is legitimate or properly accredited or whether NA will help them achieve their goals. In Canada, George Brown's place is very clear. It's a vocational school. And it offers vocational programs. If you want a degree you should go to a university. But if you want a vocational qualification, this will work just fine.

As such, I hope George Brown isn't getting into the degree game. Our waters are very muddy. Had DEAC stuck to diplomas and certificates and maybe the occasional associates degree, half the battles on this forum would have never taken place. The whole RA vs NA debate would be a non-issue. As much as I think DEAC offers value as an accreditor, I feel like they and ACICS really screwed things up by accrediting degrees above the associates level. So I don't want to start dragging other countries into the fray as well because I feel like it diminishes what these schools are really good at.

George Brown strikes me a bit like the Cleveland Institute of Electronics. It has its niche area. It's respected there. I'll be a bit disappointed if, a few years from now, we're looking at yet another generic MBA program offered by George Brown.

 

Emmm... https://www.georgebrown.ca/degrees/
Canadian CCs were conceived as these vocational places, but they had a lot of evolution going on. They have a ginormous range of offerings. It's still unusual to think of them as degree providers, but they increasingly are. Bringing some ambiguity into the whole recognition game. These degrees are legit because the schools are public, and there are Ministerial Consents... yet they are not university degrees. I wonder if they'll be received as 100% RA equivalent (FWIW I think they should). And for full disclosure, I adjunct at one (Humber College).


And yeah, GB is respected among CAATs. Rather large, too.

 

Funny thing. As Stanislav correctly notes, CAATs in Ontario are awarding degrees. Mostly via day (and night) school -- so far. They have tons of DL but not so much in degree programs - yet. Some pretty dandy offerings, too. Places like Sheridan, Humber - Neuhaus, you'll find a degree from these schools really means something! If any cross your desk, talk to the people and let us know what you think of these CC degrees then! And we're talking pretty well all 4-year Bachelor's degrees. For some reason, the Associate degree hardly exists in Ontario. Neither Universities nor Colleges have ever bothered with it here. You go to college for 2 (or 3) years, you get a diploma. In BC and some other provinces, Associate Degrees are quite common for 2 years of college.

In Ontario, we've had our present College system since 1967 - Centennial (of Confederation) project. It's still evolving - and I think the pace of evolution has recently been ratcheted up a notch or two.

 

Very interesting.

What, then, is the difference between a degree from a college and a university when they are in the same subject area?

So, for these more vocational programs I think the distinction is pretty clear. The degree levels don't separate them, the subject matter does. If I want to study the liberal arts I'm, presumably, heading to university. If I want to study construction, I'm going to college.

What then of programs like, say, the bachelor of science in nursing? Whether one receives their degree from George Brown or UToronto shouldn't be an issue of licensure, which is usually our first hurdle. But would the graduate of George Brown be able to progress toward a Masters at a university?

I'm not trying to snark here. What I'm trying to get at is whether the separation between the CAAT and the university is as absolute as RA/NA in the U.S. or if it is driven more by subject matter. I likely wouldn't try to get into the PhD program in Africana Studies at a university with my bachelors degree in construction management. But I could see someone trying to use their George Brown B.Comm. to get into an MBA program at a university. Historically, I imagine this would have been less of a problem.

Speaking of associates degrees...

I understand the concept. In reality, I think that they enjoyed a brief era of utility in the American job market. I've long admired, at least from afar and without any direct experience in it, the qualification scheme of New Zealand and Australia. To me, it makes sense to not create bachelors degrees for fields that don't require bachelors degrees but to instead come up with an equivalent qualification for that field. I say this mainly because every HR shop I've ever worked in has job descriptions that require a bachelors degree "or equivalent" with no standard for how to evaluate said equivalency.

 

Historically, organizations would accept a certain number of years of experience in lieu of a degree. In certain fields in certain places, licensing had some exceptions carved out which made the "or equivalent" piece more relevant to seekers. Up until the early 2000s, I believe, it was possible to be a CPA in New York State without a bachelors degree if you met other criteria (years of experience under a licensed CPA and a handful of courses). In NYS now, they are all grandfathered in, but you can't earn a CPA outside of the new 150 credit scheme. But if, twenty years ago, I was hiring a CPA a bachelors degree was a very relevant requirement. If, however, a qualified CPA with no bachelors degree came around, it gave hiring managers the wiggle room necessary.

It is something that I have been excising from job descriptions as they come up for renewal because I feel that, today, it is a useless phrase that is prone to abuse.

For example, I once had a departmental VP trying to force the head of technical writing to hire his relative as a technical writer on the basis of having a B.A. in English Lit. After all, if you can write poetry you can write a technical manual, right? Therefore a B.A. in English Lit is equivalent to the B.S. in a technical field required for the position, right?

 

Interesting question, and I don't think it's quite closed yet. I believe that while the college-earned Bachelor's is technically equivalent and should get you into Master's, it's not true for all Master's programs. This was one reason given when Sheridan College announced they want to get to full University status and join Universities Canada group.

 

Very easy answer, in the College where I am right now. When you graduate from the Nursing program at Mohawk College, you receive your Bachelor of Science in Nursing from McMaster University.
https://www.mohawkcollege.ca/programs/health/nursing-bscn-731

George Brown College? You receive your Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree from Ryerson University. That should take care of any problems.
https://www.georgebrown.ca/s118-2018-2019/

 

Back in the late 80s, the first time I graduated (night school) from a CAAT (I was 46) most Universities would look at CAAT grads' records with disdain - studies there counted for zip at University. All changed now - IIRC, Athabasca U. was one of the pioneers. Most CAAT grads can count on "time served" or nearly so if they go to University. I found one loophole, back in the old days. Some pretty good American schools would give a CAAT grad "time served" (and a scholarship - maybe 50% or so) if they had really good College marks. I would have liked to have taken one (very fine) school in N.Y. State up on that offer and commuted to school across the nearby border - but I had 4 more years to serve at work before I could "take the money and run" (retire).

 

At one point in the late 90s, I was taking fiction-writing and accounting simultaneously in university night classes. I got 'A's in both. Perhaps I could have become a "creative accountant" but the pay-scale in jail didn't appeal.