DEAC (fka DETC) Success Stories

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Maniac Craniac, Nov 4, 2010.

  1. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    Though it was far less dramatic than the ABET accreditation, I'd add that the CCNE accreditation for Aspen and Ashworth was also a fairly transformative moment. Things like this change the math in the NA vs RA debate.
  2. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Some DEAC (former DETC) degree holders may find UK Universities and other overseas universities more accepting of DETC /DEAC degrees in to post grad programs.
    The issue that some may encounter is programmatic accreditation requirements of graduate school programs. So one should check by discipline.
    But in general its good that people are warned about utility and acceptance of degrees. It got so competitive that even good state RA degree may not be sufficient.
  3. Hamburger

    Hamburger New Member

    The National Tax Training School is accredited by the DETC.
    I think it is an excellent school.
    I have certificates from both of its tax courses.

    AA - History - Rockland Community College
    AAS - Accounting - Rockland Community College
    AAS - Business Administration - Rockland Community College
    BA - History - Dominican College of Blauvelt
    BSc - Accounting - Dominican College of Blauvelt
    Graduate Business Certificate - University at Buffalo - The State University of New York
  4. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    It's funny to look back at this particular thread and as of February 26, 2020, USDE Principal Deputy Under Secretary Diane Auer Jones sent a letter to state higher education leaders concerning the final accreditation and state authorization for distance education regulations. The letter highlighted that the new regulations have removed geography from an accrediting agency’s scope, meaning USDE will no longer distinguish between regional and national accrediting agencies but will classify accrediting organizations as institutional and programmatic accreditors.”

    We are in a time in education where these types of debates are becoming moot. As long as a school is recognized and stands on its on merits, it is a relevant enough to gain an effective credential. Also, 10 years ago MOOCs were not a thing like they are now. With the globalization of education, accreditation is becoming less important as the higher education system struggles. Even non-accredited institutions are becoming more relevant and will not be demonized as much as they use to be because there are so many ways that are faster and more efficient to get an education and effective professional development. What was considered diploma mills 20 years ago are the new efficient, recognized, and accredited ways of getting a credential now. Accreditation alone remains important but the level of it will continue to matter less in the future as long as we have professional networks and education initiatives to showcase credentials and strengths which is more important than accreditation. If it's good enough to put on a profile or resume, it is good enough to be hired.
    farmboy and Neuhaus like this.
  5. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    There was a time in the not too distant past where community colleges were considered a joke and transfer of those credits to a four year school was by no means assured unless they had an articulation agreement in place. Today, I know at least three people who went to community college and transferred into Cornell to finish their degrees. Years ago, the idea of a community college awarding a bachelors degree would have been unheard of.

    Our accreditation system isn't bad. However, it has been heavily fragmented, and thus confusing, for years.

    When I was in high school people would snicker at the idea that community college could eventually lead to an Ivy League degree for someone. Now it's a very common path. And I think we're likely to see a lot of the same snickering end over things like DEAC degrees. NA schools are building up a portfolio of articulation agreements with RA schools (many for-profit, but still). Programmatic accreditation, once out of reach for the likes of DEAC accredited schools, is becoming a thing at levels not likely imagined.

    The system is evolving. That's probably a good thing.
  6. Jonathan Whatley

    Jonathan Whatley Well-Known Member

    When I took organic chemistry at Harvard Extension School, my lab partner was a Harvard College student who had transferred there from community college. (She was taking orgo from Extension rather than from College for scheduling reasons with permission of her advisor.)
  7. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Not because the government says it.

    John Bear and I each conducted research in this area 20 years ago. Mine was with HR professionals--my dissertation. His was with college admissions officials and registrars. (I did the statistical analysis on that one, too.) Both indicated significant gaps in terms of acceptability of degrees and credits from nationally accredited school by employers and colleges.

    To my knowledge, there has not been more recent research on this question. It feels like the times are a-changin', but we don't know to what extent. But to say this question is now moot is unsupportable when we know there remains huge gaps.

    The federal government's declaration may have a positive effect over time, but just them saying it doesn't make it so. Accreditation in the United States arose because of the lack of a central authority regarding higher education. The colleges and universities banded together over the first have of the 20th century to form these "regional associations." That much history isn't going away because some bureaucrat decided so.

    Thus, it is not a good idea to suggest to readers that these differences can be safely ignored. They cannot.
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  8. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    I didn't say it is moot, I stated it's becoming moot or atleast not as important. Sure there will always be powers that be who will shift things here and there but accreditation will never become completely obsolete.
    Last edited: May 9, 2022
  9. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Please support this.
  10. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    In supporting this, I'm reflecting on how social media like LinkedIn and other forms of validations such as MOOC credentials in conjunction with prior learning assessments have given us more ways to obtain an education without really needing to spend time in the classroom. Experimental learning is continually expanding which was unaccredited in the past. While accreditation is important, it is not seen as the only stamp of approval for many educational institutions as it once was. Society is pulling away from degrees and accreditation in order to find other ways to validate skills and trainings for employment that appear more useful for the workforce. Maybe my statement should be traditional higher education is becoming less important rather than accreditation alone. There is less weight on traditional higher education or atleast it is constantly being reformed to where it will look nothing like it did 20 years earlier, 20 years later. Archaic systems will continue to exist but will not be able to compete with the innovation of education.
    Last edited: May 9, 2022
  11. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    Time will, of course, tell what happens as these distinctions are no longer made by USDOE. And that will be difficult to monitor because the ways it which this change can occur can be many and can be highly nuanced in every iteration.

    For example, I would have to imagine that this will make WES rethink how it approaches evaluations for US Degrees for Canada. Before, they had an easy out; "RA or the highway."

    They can, of course, continue what they were doing. They can have a white list of approved accreditors for Canadian equivalency. Without a government distinction, however, it feels like they would be opening themselves up to a lawsuit they would probably not win and the fallout of which could be far worse than simply letting the likely handful of NA grads trying to bring their degrees to Canada pass through unscathed.

    States with RA requirements for employment can likewise set what that means. But again, the distinction feels quite arbitrary barring a federal recognition. What, exactly, would New York's reasoning be for why a degree for the civil service must come from a school accredited by a regional accreditor (or New York's Board of Regents) but not, say, ABHE or DEAC? Worse yet, why is it that a school with institutional accreditation through ABHE or DEAC is not acceptable unless that school just happens to be located in New York and is registered with the Board of Regents (New York's state approval. Not the same as accreditation by the BOR)?

    So, in theory, a Christian college with two campuses; one in Scranton, PA and one in Binghamton, NY accredited by ABHE would come down to which campus you attended as to whether your degree would qualify you for state employment?

    Again, feels like a lawsuit waiting to happen. When the fed made the distinction between the accreditors then there was something. New York, like many others, was picking a class of accreditors. Now it would appear like an arbitrary cherry picking.

    At the same time, if the National Student Clearinghouse continues to bar some of these soon to be formerly NA schools that seems like it would be within their rights. However, since many institutions and employers use their verification to verify degree information, it could present a serious problem for the advancement of those formerly NA schools. The states might change. The WES might change. But the NSC might stay still and that alone could hinder any enhanced access to employment.

    Long story short...

    There are so many ways it can all change everything or change nothing. It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
  12. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    It's interesting how things continue to change and/or become a bit more complicated. I personally think while accreditation will continue to matter, it will not have the monopoly it did in the past to determine quality and acceptance. There will be so many moving parts and ultimately acceptance will start to become unique in each circumstance instead of blanket accreditation. In fact, more situations are cropping up now more than ever with articulation agreements and the increase of prior learning assessments for credits.

    Also, the jobs that really care most about accreditation as we know it are government and education intuitions. Other industries in the private sector won't care about the level of accreditation as far as regional vs national vs state approved that much. I'm speaking only for the USA. Provided the degree is verifiable, it would likely be accepted.
    Last edited: May 9, 2022
  13. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    I can't stand WES! :mad:

    They evaluated my partner's 47 credits from the Phillippines as 34 credits by basically taking one credit away from each class so that the number of hours could fit into a one year equivalent of study. His community college wouldn't accept the evaluation because for every 3 credit hours they gave 2 credit hours and for every 2 credit hours they gave 1 credit hour so I had to improvise as a former higher education employee and resubmit a revised report on his behalf myself so they would accept it because WES would not change their report and left it up to the school.

    When I complete my PhD from Azteca/UCN, I know WES has blacklisted them and that is fine because I would not use them again anyway after this experience. I'm going to use IEE as they are the most progressive. I might do an ENEB/Isabel I degree at some point and have it evaluated with IEE as well.
    Last edited: May 9, 2022
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    IEE evaluates ENEB programs not as a Master's but as 30 credits of graduate level credit, right? I wonder what US-based doctoral programs would say, "Sure, that qualifies you to apply."
  15. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Argumentation is a form of support, but you keep calling upon sources ("society...") without any backing for them. Yes, a good argument from a trusted source should be considered support, but I'm not convinced here. Perhaps you're right, and I have no particular reason to argue that you are not, but your positions are unsupported.
  16. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I still fail to see the argument for DEAC's existence.

    There was a time, as the National Home Study Council, when the covered a niche: correspondence training. They slowly moved into accrediting DL schools awarding degrees, first technical, then academic. I believe the RAs' resistance to DL encouraged the then-DETC to move into accrediting degree-granting schools on a larger scale. But it wasn't too long before the RA schools got into the act in a bigger way. Soon, it was very clear that DETC accreditation was simply easier and faster to get. This was demonstrated by a couple of start-ups pursuing both and getting DETC accreditation far more quickly than RA.

    Even today, DEAC accreditation is easier to get. A few years ago California passed a law saying all unaccredited schools had to be on a path to accreditation by a certain date or close. At the time, WASC indicated it would seriously consider these schools--mostly small, mostly for-profit, mostly DL, and mostly funded by tuition. But it didn't. So, those schools either closed (like Ryokan) or pursued alternate institutional accreditation. (ACICS at first, the DEAC when ACICS collapsed.)

    The point is two-fold. First, DEAC accreditation still seems easier to get. This may or may not be a bad thing--are they more fair or are they pushovers? (They've accredited some really bad-acting schools and, for awhile, several blatantly outside their scope.) Second, DEAC covers no unique niche. Not anymore, and not for a couple of decades. Distance learning--DEAC's supposed niche--is no longer an impediment to accreditation, and hasn't been for a very long time.

    The same argument can be made regarding other accrediting agencies of degree-granting institutions, except for niche areas (like TRACS) who might be able to argue for their unique seat at the table. But DEAC (or ACICS)? Why?
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  17. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    While I haven't looked at this and thus it's only speculation, I wouldn't be surprised if the area where DEAC is more lenient is not necessarily academics (at least now) but finances. For a lot of small, tuition-drive schools, I could see the financial requirements being the tougher nut to crack for RA. We do know that that's sunk a number of HBCUs, for example.

    As for justifying their existence, I would say that the one who wants to forbid has a greater burden of proof than the one who wants to permit. So perhaps the question is not "Why?", but "Why not?"

    (I realize you didn't actually call for DEAC to be ended; I'm just painting with broad strokes here.)
  18. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    According to University of Arkansas Fayetteville, they will accept a Masters degree or its equivalent (30 graduate hours) for entry into their doctorate of education degrees so technically for some RA programs, this evaluation would work. Also, a pre-evaluation from IEE stated they are likely to give the ENEB/Isabel I Master's degree the equivalent of a graduate diploma or graduate certificate (30 graduate hours). For all intents and purposes, they are giving this a Master's equivalent without calling it a Masters since the propio is an unofficial degree.

    I recently found out that University of Azteca's propio degrees are recognized as accredited degrees awarded by unaccredited programs. Instead of not recognizing the degrees or just recognizing the hours, I saw where there was an evaluation from IEE that divided the accreditation by institution and program as opposed to a straight accredited vs non-accredited result . So propio degrees in this are institutionally accredited but programmatically non-accredited. This is definitely a positive result and may be applicable to ENEB as well at some point.
    Last edited: May 9, 2022
  19. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    So then the million dollar question is whether the University of Arkansas accepts evaluations from IEE. I ask because some institutions will accept an evaluation from any NACES member, but others only from one or two pet evaluators.
    Dustin likes this.
  20. cacoleman1983

    cacoleman1983 Active Member

    That I don't know. Luckily, I am not in that situation since I would automatically qualify for admissions to their degree with my already earned Masters of Education degree and a Graduate Certificate. Of course I would have to take the dreadful GRE and score atleast in the 50 percentile. I had been thinking about this program since it is online and takes only 2.5 years but never made the decision to enroll.

Share This Page