Clark Howard: If It's Not RA, It's 'Bogus,' '[Not] Any Good,' 'Worthless'

duh, it's the RA Degree

I dunno about any of ya'll . . . . . . .

but my U.S.D.O.E. ---> C.H.E.A. ------> S.A.C.S. -------> R.A. : PhD, C.D. & D.V.D. grants me authority.

 

Oh, I don't know. Perhaps having a couple of decades working with these issues, university teaching and leadership/administrative experience, and a Ph.D. in higher education might be a good start.

 

Those are valid, uncontested points. If you had but a few brief moments to present the entire subject of institutional accreditation to an audience unfamiliar with the subject, the surest and safest message would be to stick to regional accreditation. What irks me is how far beyond that Howard went to unfairly characterize all other schools - legitimately accredited or not - as 'crummy,' to quote the word he used on air.

It almost seems he's specifically targeting nationally accredited schools because those are the only non-regionally accredited institutions, to my knowledge, with which DoE officials would be in cahoots.

 

At the risk of giving an over-simplified response..."well, duh!"

But...saying an RA degree is more widely accepted than an NA degree or saying an NA degree is less valuable is LIGHT YEARS away from calling NA degrees "bogus", "worthless" or a "scam", which is what Clark Howard seems to be doing . I think that gives an erroneous impression of DETC accreditation.

 

I agree with you (and Mark, above). Clark is wrong regarding those kinds of characterizations, but he serves as an example of what graduates from NA schools may sometimes face.

 

I'm sure you are correct.

 

And it is many times worse for those graduates of the very few legitimate unaccredited schools out there.

 

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Rich...my NA degree is perfectly legit and every bit as "good" as an RA degree, however due to ignorance and hypocrisy I am forced to get a RA degree to be recognized by the state of Texas Law Enforcement Commission...sucks, but that's life I'm afraid. I almost spent $20,000 for a degree that would have had VERY limited use here in my state in my profession.

 

Well, I only intend to use my NA associates degree as a stepping stone to an RA bachelors. In the meantime, I am more interested in the knowledge I am gaining than trying to use the associates to gain employment. That's when the RA bachelors will come into play.

 

I read this on average, once a week. Some I drill into the details and on rare occasions I respond. I just have to stand and give Mr. DesElms a golf clap for his response. He reminds me of the guy in corporate America that throws subtle jabs to every co-worker and they don't even realize they are getting jabbed.

You , Mr DesElms, are voted the b-buster of the day, for this Friday October 7th 2005.

 

Where some may see insolence and jabs, others, including I, see humor and a pretty light fare.

Oh, well. To each his or her own.

Thanks.

 

Jake A

I too see a great deal of humor in this...that's part of the busting of what I refer.....

 

You should defend your NA education to the ignorant state of Texas. Why give up and walk away with your tail between your legs?

The Executive Director of the DETC, Mr. Michael Lambert, could assist you in drafting a letter to the Texas Law Enforcement Commission. As you said, "due to ignorance" your forced to now get a RA degree.

Why don't you educate the state of Texas about accreditation? You could make a difference not only for yourself, but for others as well.

As quoted by Albert Einstein, "In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity."

 

I wonder if there's a bias against D/L in Texas government in general?

I ask because of the Texas Bar's refusal to allow an attorney applicant to take the Texas Bar if his J.D. is based in whole or in part on correspondence study REGARDLESS of membership in other states' Bars or years of practice experience. Even earning an LL.M. from a resident, ABA school will not qualify the D/L J.D. holder.

The Taxas Bar's attitude is especially strange in light of the fact that the Texas Bar is very liberal regarding admission without examination and admission of foreign lawyers. They don't even require reciprocity!

 

It could be because to become a CPA in Texas you CANNOT have a DL degree and the license issuing agency specifically excludes distance learning on their website...regardless or accreditation. I'm not sure about the psychology or counselor licensing agencies.

 

This is a shame! Being not at all knowledgeable about the background or history of this development, it does appear quite onerous and over-bearing to me. Baring all DL activities regardless of accreditation?!

I wonder if it is at all legal. Can a(ny) state or state agency, in its rightful duty to monitor quality in education and schools, specifically bar a resident from a specific learning (DL) - not credentialing - modality? A gaping invitation to a corrective class-action suit, I hope?

Thanks.

 

One of my graduate school professors had a terrific line about professed expertise: An expert is a guy from out of town with a set of slides. I guess it would probably be a power point nowadays.

I never caught Howard's show when I was in Georgia. Is he at all like Ludlow Porch?

 

Okay...just for kicks I'm going to look into the various State Licensing agencies for Texas and their requirements. Who knows, maybe I'll raise a few eyebrows.

 

Jake:

I agree.

 

In general, I am pro-R/A. However, there are situations where R/A is really not a positive.

As I mentioned a looooooong time ago, I hold a California CMP (Certified Massage Practitioner) credential. The school I received it from was not R/A. Not having R/A did not prevent me from obtaining credentialing. Not a single one of my clents ever asked if the school was R/A.

The same can be said for many schools that teach many needed skills for today's world. For many careers, the importance is the needed training, and if needed, credentialing. For degree seeking individulas, I would strongly suggest people look at R/A. As an alternative (based on their need and motivation), I might suggest N/A (e.g. DETC).

The issue with many of these media types is they have to give information for the masses. They haven't the time to discuss individual situations and are caught in giving "always, always, always....... never, never, never, type of advisce. It is like many of the media based financial/investor advice programs out there. While I agree with a lot of what they may say, there are some situations where I know the information is a potential lawsuit wating to happen. However, it does make for interesting entertainment....... especially now that Star Trek (new episodes) is off the air.