Doctor of Management (DM) - 42 Credits/TRACS - about $16K USD

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by AsianStew, Jun 22, 2022.

Loading...
  1. AsianStew

    AsianStew Moderator Staff Member

    @Alpine , True. I was just doing a quick comparison and noted that they were both TRACS and the pricing was about $18K USD for the degree. But I also noted some basic differences such as VUL would be 1 year and IAU would take at minimum 2-4 years depending on the student and that this is a Management vs a Health Admin. Other than that, I didn't waste any time looking up their background as much as I should... I'll leave it to prospective students or the degree sleuths here to do their due diligence in deciding for themselves if the program is doable (or not).
     
    Alpine likes this.
  2. Alpine

    Alpine Active Member

    I would also mention that the VUL DHA is a minimum of one year if one enters with two masters degrees or one masters and sufficient graduate credits to meet the 90 credit minimum.
     
    felderga likes this.
  3. Futuredegree

    Futuredegree Active Member

    Only benefit of IAU is that it has some type of accreditation even if it’s TRACS which can be used to mark a check box on US government job applications as they accept nationally accredited schools as education requirements. Getting a doctoral degree from IAU may help someone advance forward in their career. Now are there plenty of other better options ? Of course but it is what works for someone’s goals I don’t think we should knock it down.
     
    Johann likes this.
  4. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    "I say we should. Gimme that sledgehammer, Zeke. This baby's goin' right inta th' ground!" ;)

    Seriously, what you say makes good sense - as usual. I think the accreditor is 'way worse than the school - but it DOES check the box, no matter how much I disapprove of it. So - I have to agree with all your points.

    Oh well, IAU is at least a better recommendation than one we got from the O.P. a while ago - Islamic Open University. That one turned out to be headed by a guy banned from about 18 countries - and he's an unindicted co-conspirator in a bombing... A degree from THAT guy? Talk about KA-BOOM! :D

    Things are changing for the better, I guess.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2022 at 2:31 AM
    Futuredegree likes this.
  5. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I'm not endorsing TRACS. Frankly, I am now opposed to institutional accreditation that isn't RA. I just don't see the purpose anymore. (The RAs aren't perfect, of course, and there still seems to be some prejudice towards smaller schools.) Thus, I'm against TRACS for the same reason I'm against the DEAC. Neither truly serves a unique purpose, and both should be programmatic accreditors instead. (TRACS for programs in religion and DEAC for programs delivered by DL.) There might even be an argument against that. But there's nothing about the schools these two agencies accredit that is unique to them. If an RA can accredit Liberty and an RA can accredit Excelsior, then who needs TRACS and DEAC? Again, what unique ground to they cover? (Except as a haven for schools that cannot yet attain RA.)

    That said, when I talk about being embarrassed by your degree, I'm talking about being exposed for holding a bogus credential from an unrecognized institution. While I think we can draw all kinds of distinctions between TRACS and DEAC, it really doesn't make a difference when it comes to this issue. There is no reason to think accreditation from one of these or the other will make any material difference in this regard. So, if you have a beef against TRACS, fine. You also have a beef against DEAC. Because both of them are two peas in a pod, and any distinctions between them are distinctions without a difference.

    So, other than someone's personal distaste for one, the other, or even both, please show how one form of accreditation either benefits or hurts graduates compared to the other.
     
  6. Futuredegree

    Futuredegree Active Member

    Copper has mentioned this before in the VUL post

    "I would prefer a "Gold standard" approach to accreditation:
    RA = Gold
    NA = Silver
    Other USDE recognized accreditation = Bronze. Although USDE recognized accreditation now includes all precious metals.
    State Recognition = Tin
    Unaccredited = some oxidation
    Diploma mill = Rust Bucket!"

    There are levels to accreditation. If it works for you, go for it. As far as I understand the US DOE does not distinguish between RA and NA anymore.
     
    sideman, Johann and chrisjm18 like this.
  7. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    That's what they say -- and I assume they mean it. I think schools, employers, credential evaluators world-wide, professional associations, degree forums and everyone else will wrangle over that for years to come - decades, maybe.
     
    Rachel83az likes this.
  8. sideman

    sideman Active Member

    Courtesy of your friend and mine, Google:

    TRACS is recognized by both the United States Department of Education (USDOE) and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)
    as a national institutional accrediting agency for Christian post-secondary institutions, colleges, universities, and seminaries.

    The Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC) is a private, non-profit organization founded in 1926 that operates as an institutional accreditor of distance education institutions.
     
  9. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    Strangely, I've seen about a dozen instances of organizations only recognizing regional accreditors and DEAC. I did come across one government agency that only recognized regional accreditors and TRACS. I suspect an employee fought for recognition of their degree. TRACS' recent government scrutiny, bizarre accreditation requirements, and current trend of accrediting schools that have lost accreditation does not look good.

    Simply focusing on the utility of NA ignores the stability issue. DEAC will likely continue to be recognized for a long time; TRACS is in danger of becoming like ACICS and ACCSC. DEAC seems to be the popular starter accreditor while schools seek RA, and many have been successful in attaining RA. TRACS seems to be the fallback accreditor for failed schools.
     
    sideman and Johann like this.
  10. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    True - every word of the post! And...
    Kudos! Right on the money! :)
     
  11. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Please provide any evidence that this is reflective of the real world.

    Sometimes RA is the standard. Other times, other forms of institutional accreditation is fine. In still others, programmatic accreditation is preferred or even mandatory. In such cases, wouldn’t that make it the gold standard?

    Sorry, but those designations don’t reflect real life.
    That doesn’t matter in the myriad situations where that distinction DOES make a difference.
     
    Michael Burgos and Dustin like this.
  12. Michael Burgos

    Michael Burgos Active Member

    I've gone through the TRACS members list in detail. If shoddy websites are any indication, there is much to be desired. Clearly, many TRACS accredited schools are quite small with a few notable exceptions (BJU). I should also add that ABHE has accredited some questionable institutions too. TRACS may be the only attainable accreditation for a small theologically conservative school and is thus a good option for Bible colleges and seminaries. As far as theological education, a TRACS degree has the same utility in every vocation except academia and hospital chaplaincy (military chaplaincy?). For all of the other disciplines (e.g., business; sciences; tech), TRACS accreditation may become a liability IMO.
     
  13. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    Unless an employer requires ATS accreditation, TRACS should be fine for chaplaincy.
     
  14. Alpine

    Alpine Active Member

    I agree! Programmatic accreditation is everything in the world of acceptance for licensing, certification, professional credentialing, etc. Without it, we wouldn't have medical professionals, engineers, school teachers, etc. To me, it far outweighs institutional accreditation because, without programmatic accreditation, I can't make a living. It's the "Green Standard," green meaning $$$. However, my understanding is that most program accreditors want institutional accreditation as a baseline for considering accrediting their programs.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2022 at 9:39 PM
  15. Michael Burgos

    Michael Burgos Active Member

    The vast vast majority of hospital chaplaincies require regional or ATS; and for that matter, a significant amount of CPE.
     
  16. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    CPE has nothing to do with RA or ATS. The industry standard for CPE accreditation is ACPE.

    Do you have a source that says that most hospitals require regional or ATS accreditation? I just went through several pages of hospital chaplain openings in Texas, and not one of them mentioned regional accreditation or ATS.

    The military, just like the rest of the federal government, doesn't discriminate against NA, and this was true before the Department of Education got rid of the distinctions.
     
  17. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Under what circumstances? (Unless TRACS folds for some reason, which I cannot imagine.)

    Who makes this kind of distinction between non-RA institutional accreditation?
    I believe they all do, but perhaps there is an exception out there. Most expect RA, too, even if they don't make that explicit on their websites.
     
  18. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Quite so. For example, the military included DEAC*-accredited schools in its DANTES catalogs as far back as the late 1980s. At that time, schools listed in the DANTES catalog were automatically approved for tuition assistance for military members.

    *Back then it was the NHSC, which became DETC in 1994 and DEAC in 2014. The mentality of what distance learning actually consists of goes back to 1926 with no perceptible change since.
     
  19. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    No change? Is it the mentality unchanged, now that DEAC accredits schools to award degrees as high as professional doctorates? Back in 1926 - and for many years thereafter, this org. did not accredit ANY degree programs. If not changed, has it been seriously enhanced?
     
  20. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Yes, but if we ever see a Flat Earth University, TRACS would be their only hope for recognized accreditation. :)
     

Share This Page