Institutions go accreditor shopping!

ACCSC's 5-year renewal by USDE delayed. Reasons here:
https://www.republicreport.org/2021/education-dept-delays-renewal-of-for-profit-college-accreditor/

Another story on ACCSC here. there are quite a few out there and they aren't good - at all.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/college-accrediting-agency-failed-protect-students-decade-fraud

My take: ACCSC could be the next ACICS (i.e. gone.) We don't know for sure yet.

 

ACCSC came out of that USDE kerfuffle - they got their renewal but on a short leash. 3 years instead of 5. They're being watched.
Some stuff on them in this mainly ACICS thread: https://www.degreeinfo.com/index.php?threads/feds-strip-authority-of-college-accreditor-behind-itt-tech-apparently-fake-university.61420/#post-574203

My take: Those schools shopping for accreditors should forget ACCET and COE - they only accredit vocational applied associates degrees. My suggestion - head for TRACS ... and start praying, of course.

And when can I ditch this DI job as research assistant? The pay is terrible!
So....When do I get to be Fashion Editor?

 

Seeing that:

(1) There's probably nobody home at ACICS to stop them - or nobody who would really want to.
(2) Some dishonest schools get away with claiming bogus accreditation that really isn't --- forever.

As long as nobody makes silly attempts to access Title IV funding, I'd think they can hold on for quite a while yet; they might get a cease-and-desist order sometime - a decade or two, maybe. I hope I'm wrong - but I don't think so.

 

There website is still up.

No to be pedantic, but de-listing by the US Department of Education does not mean they suddenly ceased to exist. And, unless the organization is dissolved, the claim to be accredited by it was not affected by the Department of Education's action.

I see that they are no longer listed by CHEA, which actually matters more to me than the USDoE. Accreditation is a private, not governmental activity. CHEA and its component accrediting agencies are the self-governing structure of higher education in the US. The USDoE has a much more narrow function: to recognize accrediting agencies whose accredited schools will be eligible for federal financial aid. When the USDoE de-listed some accreditors awhile back, it was because those accreditors didn't confer Title IV power on their schools. That didn't make the schools themselves any less accredited because of CHEA.

ACICS is listed by neither. A school accredited by them is still accredited by them. That accreditation has taken on a whole new meaning, of course, and I would rather that their accredited schools disclose this to potentials students--who typically do not make these distinctions.

We've seen one serious attempt to create an accrediting agency for "nontraditional" schools (besides DEAC). It never got anywhere with CHEA or USDoE. Every other unrecognized form of accreditation has been part of a larger scam to sell fake degrees.

Bottom line: Until ACICS dissolves, these schools are accredited by ACICS, an unrecognized accrediting agency.

 

ACICS has indicated its intent to dissolve its incorporation. They cite March 1, 2024, as doomsday. I spent a few hours back in September reading through the morass of literature on this institution and its dealings with the USDE and its delegates. IMO, mistakes were made both by ACICS and the USDE, but I do not believe this warranted derecognition. It is unfortunate that a politician has the power to destroy an institution in this way.

 

Thanks, Rich. Great explanation.

 

I know it's a matter of opinion, but I did get to deal with them in person, and I'm not so sure they didn't deserve it. In my opinion, they were in way over their heads with both the scope of their accreditation and the number of schools they accredited. I also got the feeling (but we didn't get that far) that their process, while detailed, didn't have difficult standards. I felt they were focused on consumer protection (I know. Ironic given the nature of their demise) better suited for trade schools, not universities.

 

ACICS self-destructed through turning a blind eye to the practices of schools it had accredited. All for money.

I think it is unfortunate that a politician (Donald Trump) could sway his appointee (Betsy DeVos) to give a clearly dysfunctional accreditor a further stay of execution after the overwhelming debacles that had occurred with its "Chain of Schools" - e.g. Corinthian Colleges and ITT schools. Those schools and their failures messed with a lot of lives - mainly students and their teachers, employees of the failed schools.

ACICS should have been shuttered long before it was. Preventative medicine.

 

That may be. Then again, your take might be too simplistic.

I'm not convinced that your depiction is quite accurate. Congress, you recall, gave ACICS schools a year and a half following the Obama-era ruling (a total of 36 mos.). Huge swaths of interviews, articles, et al. from the relevant committee at the time centered on the debate regarding the legitimacy or lack thereof of for-profit higher education. Politics goes both ways. DeVos gave ACICS a year, complete with a wide-ranging set of compliance requirements. While this approach was obviously different than the straight-up derecognition of the previous administration, at least DeVos sought to engender positive reforms that would, had they been completely followed, have benefitted both the schools and their students. Indeed, most of those reforms were made on time. However, a significant amount of documentation provided by the accreditor to the USDE went unreviewed. IMO, the Biden USDE had already made up its mind.

 

I have zero interest in relying on what Betsy DeVos might have intended. She was an unqualified, political hack who had no business in the role. Another interpretation is that ACICS accredited mostly for-profit schools who would be a good source for political donations and, thus, worth keeping around despite myriad scandals among them and ACICS's irresponsible lack of action regarding them.

ACICS was a failed DEAC and grossly negligent. Betsy DeVos was in a public service role in which she failed to protect the public. We are all better off to be rid of both of them. Together, they were a pestilence on higher education in America.

 

Just for fun, I decided to go back and look at all the US Secretaries of Education to see which did not have graduate and/or first professional degrees. The list:

• Margaret Spellings (no educational background)
• Arne Duncan (CEO of Chicago Public Schools)
• Betsy DeVos (No educational background except in politics)

That's the list. None of them had careers in education, but Duncan actually worked in an education system (heading it up as the equivalent of a superintendent of schools) He's the only Democrat of the three.

All the other permanent Secretaries had advanced degrees.