Kennedy-Western lawsuit

Not directly related to Arno's alleged suggestion...however...

I've just read several CA Senate hearings on Postsecondary Ed. Apparently, BPPVE must withstand another round of 10% budgetary cuts in order to help cover the CA deficit. In that same hearing, it was noted that a monitor will be appointed to report on the BPPVE, its processes, procedures, and enforcement effectiveness in early 2005. (this underscores the need for objective data, since there is lots of speculation) Apparently, the law sponsoring BPPVE is to be extended to 2007.

Also, in another Senate hearing related to regional accreditation and required approval by BPPVE of RA schools, it was noted that the last time an evaluation of approval standards and regulations vs accreditation was conducted in 1991, it was determined that CA approval standards were MORE stringent than regional accreditation. It was recommended that a more current evaluation be conducted to keep the data current, and in a cost cutting measure it was recommended that approval resources not be used to re-certify/approve schools already accredited (about 10% of the total postsecondary school count in CA).

 

A blatant degree mill could have the strictest "standards" ever conceived on the face of this planet but without enforcement, it is meaningless. The problem with state approval in general has always been inconsistant enforcement.

 

Yes, I believe BPPVE's record of enforcement will come to light as a result of the monitor's study in 2005 and hopefully CA will have some objectively derived information with which to guide its policies and actions (which may also be internally corrective).

Also, in the Senate hearing on regional accreditation and the BPPVE, it was noted that the BPPVE's charter includes the approval, licensure, and regulation of all schools for the purpose of legal enforcement since (as the Senate noted), regional accreditors have no legal authority over the schools they accredit.

 

Isn't that why it is called voluntary accreditation? Isn't any RA school free to drop that accreditation when ever they decide they no longer want meet minimum RA requirements?

 

I wouldn't want to arm-wrestle him over it.

The BPPVE oversees some 2,000 schools. 90% of these are post-secondary vocational schools that don't grant degrees. They are your barber colleges and your truck-driving schools. Many of them offer ESL courses or classes in basic computer skills.

So the bulk of the BPPVE's responsibility doesn't seem to be consistent with a higher education agency.

If only the 200 or so CA-approved degree granting schools were transferred, we would just be duplicating approval mechanisms, as far as I can see. Why should the vocational schools and the state approved universities have separate oversight mechanisms at the taxpayer's expense?

I wonder what effect the proposed change would have, besides raising costs to the state.

One could argue that overseeing 200 schools is a more manageable task than overseeing 2,000, so each school would receive more attention.

But one could also argue that the organizational upheaval associated with splitting the BPPVE and creating a whole new higher education approval office might paralyze the new agency for some time.

There's an unfortunate tendency for managers, whether in government or in private business, to respond to every problem by redrawing organizational charts, rather than by helping their employees do their jobs better.

I'd suggest that what the BPPVE really needs is some organizational stability. It needs strong and effective management. It needs adaquate funding and staffing. And it needs some enforcement powers and access to the legal talent necessary to enforce their standards on non-conforming but litigious schools.

 

Hi

I guess I am enough a free marketist that I love the beauty of the system as it is. Any school can chose not to submit to RA or CHEA recognized approval, but would be silly to do so. Oregon's ODA adds an important safeguard without all the regulation the California system tries to implement. To me the weak link in California is the complexity. I also love the idea that it only takes 1 or 2 successful ODA like efforts clean up many of the problem schools.

 

I'd like to see the Feds make it a federal crime to sell or manufacture a secular degree that is not licensed by its appropriate government entity, foreign or domestic. That should clear up much of the bogus internet entities with exceptions being dealt with separately (like those with bogus sponsorships from corrupt governments). States should still be allowed to foster new schools and innovate, but there needs to be better agreement on standards. Maybe the Feds need to say... bachelors, masters, and doctoral level degrees require at a minimum etc etc. and anything that doesn't fall into those categories is not a degree in any State. The accreditors don't have the authority to make that happen and hence the grey areas and unnecessary complexities.

 

Re: Spare me!

What do you suggest? For my way of thinking, if there isn't some form of central leadership, you will be left with a patchwork of State laws and accreditation without authority...pretty much status quo and a field day for e-commerce raiders.

 

Re: Re: Spare me!

Years ago, there was a guy who took central leadership of affairs in his central European country. He improvred his country's economy in the middle of a worldwide depression, he built modern highways that are the standard of the world even today. His name was Adolf something-or-other.
What is really needed is more information so people can take individual responsiility and/or make educated decisions. Regional Accreditation is great for well financed schools that can show a track record. If it were to be left up to central government, my guess is that the only schools permitted would be brick and mortar state operated schools, and a few Ivy League universities like Yale. I have a friend who runs into employers questioning his degree from San Jose State. It seems many rate a college by its football team. If a forum such as this one were to be made more available to the public, a lot of the misconceptions could be cleared away. *Information not control.*

 

Re: Re: Spare me!

However the Federal Government has made it clear that other than their once every 7 year clean out, they have no interest in regulating education. California is unlikely to clean up their state. The bright spots are Oregon, Hawaii and a few other states.