Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Kizmet, Jul 12, 2016.
Mostly about ACICS with a cute little graph
I'm definitely a little disappointed that DEAC didn't make it into the graphic. Also a little curious as to why the Council on Occupational Education did.
I have a somewhat sneaky suspicion that there were a handful of accreditors out there who would have ruined the author's point so he cherrypicked accreditors.
A respectable portion, at least check, of DEAC schools don't even participate in Title IV. But they do have some. And I'd wager that those schools are held to a higher standard than some of the ACICS schools that have caused all of these problems.
Interestingly I haven't seen anyone comment about the differences between NA and RA in all of these rantings. I haven't even seen anyone comment as to the sheer enormity of our nation's accreditation scheme. Just the other day I went through a list of USDOE accreditors only to find at one new accreditor that I had not noticed before.
Graduation rates are a double-edged sword. If you have a high rate there is a perception from some that the standards are low. If you have a low rate, you get accused of having poor educational quality that's "failing the students".
Using earnings information is also questionable. There are too many variables.
I think ACICS deserves a break on some of that.
Separate names with a comma.