Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Andy Borchers, Jun 14, 2003.
Okay, and this disputes anyone's ideas, how?
1-I don't have a degree from K-W.
2- I've never suggested anyone use K-W.
3- People may choose the school they wish to use, K-W or Harvard, Excelsior or whatever they choose.
4-I support the right of people to make their own choices, since they will live with the consequences, good and bad.
5- I have no wish to be part of the degree police.
6- I strongly support the right of all people to make known their school choices without being hammered and insulted.
7- I will vigorously defend the right of any person to choose the school they wish, whether I like it or not.
8- I in no possible way believe in RA or no way!!!
Your points are well made.
This is an excellent system! It is fair.
My compliments to you James, Jeff or whom ever came up with it!
Hmmm. So you are saying an RA degree is 2x as good as a DETC degree. I have to agree with you!
2 Great, that would be a silly recommendation.
3 Umm, of course, whatever gave you a different idea?
4 Again, where would you get ANY other idea?
5 I congradulate you.
6 If by hammered you mean not having the limitations of a greatly substandard choice pointed out, that is a pretty silly idea.
7 Every one has the right to make ANY choice they want from committing a crime to literally throwing money away. If somebody posts they think doing so is a good idea they are likely to get, other, more intelligent posts in response.
8 Hmm. Seems like a strawman arguement. I have seen no one advocate what you are saying. I have seen many suggest that if you are going to invest time and money that an RA degree is clearly the best choice.
The business venture [degreeinfo] is about regionally accredited schools.
Which explains the thousands of posts about unaccredited schools, and the hundreds of people, like me, who have no connection with Degreeinfo, yet offer many points of view on the subject.
The business [degreeinfo] gets paid money by the advertisers. This by itself guarantees a bias towards the views of the advertisers. Now whether a RA/ DETC/state approved/ unaccredited/ school best suits the individual is up to that individual to decide. It's not up to the advertisers, the company-Degreeinfo, the employees of degreeinfo, or the volunteer helpers of degreeinfo. They have no more input than their own biased views to offer. Since this is the business model for degreeinfo it does not offer free open advice to forum searchers, but offers a view that corresponds to its business interests. I see many say they don't have a RA or no way view, then prove it. Name approved/DETC schools you would use or recommend. If you can't, you ARE RA or NO WAY. The proof is in the pudding. As Bruce has repeatedly said no one has the right to free speech here, it's a private business. We post here at the discretion of the commercial business" Degreeinfo." This business has a commercial agenda, and that affects the debate here. Each person should have the right to school choice and the right to post their opinions of that school without being called ignorant/disingenuous/ who are you/ what is your agenda. They probably fear it may be an agenda different than the agenda of degreeinfo. If you don't like state approved/unaccredited then don't use them/ don't recommend them/ openly give facts and reasons for not liking them---BUT allow those who do use them and like them to post about them without giving the company line or flaming them with the very slightly hidden insults, your ideas are ignorant, you are a shill, that is a stupid idea/ you know you are protected by Bruce being unwilling to call down anyone supporting RA but also know he'll protect you from counter attack. If you want open discussion this will achieve it. If you want the company line, and you do, then continue as is. Try thinking for yourselves for a change. You might get a headache at first but you can do it.
My response to kf5k's points is essntially the same as Dave's, but I'll post them anyway.
I agree with those points with one qualifier: that there be no implicit assumption that all choices are somehow equivalent, no assumption that all choices must be considered equally good.
Does such an agency even exist?
I do support efforts by people like the GAO to root out federal employees with degree-mill "credentials".
I'm assuming that this one is directed at Degreeinfo and not at life in general.
I don't think that people get hammered for their school choices, though some individuals may express the opinion that someone else's choice wasn't wise. But assuming that the person making the choice has made an informed decision, then I don't think that they encounter very much flack. An example is Dennis' enrollment in Cal Coast. He knows full well what he's doing. If he thinks that Cal Coast's program will be of value to him, I'm not gonna argue.
Where people are dissapointed is when they not only state their own choices, but expect and demand group acceptance and validation of that choice, no matter how bad it actually was. When the group fails to applaud them and expresses critical opinions of their choice instead, they feel violated and victimized.
People also encounter flack when they present their own controversial choices more generally, recommending them as good choices for everyone else. When opposing opinions are expressed in reply, that's interpreted as an attack.
So what the whiners are really demanding is not only the right to choose whichever school that they desire (a right that Degreeinfo has no ability to challenge, even if anyone wanted to), but also the right to Degreeinfo's validation and approval of that choice, and the right to promote those choices free of any disagreement or expression of contrary opinion.
Again, I agree with that so long as fraud isn't involved. Attempts to use degree-mills to mislead employers and clients will receive criticism from me.
I'm not sure if anyone who posts to Degreeinfo believes in "RA or no way". As Dave Hayden correctly points out, that's a straw man.
I'll add that I have probably spent as much time and effort arguing for the legitimacy of non-RA schools as anyone else on Degreeinfo. I think that I've had more success in making the case for selected non-RA schools than most, including you.
> When opposing opinions are expressed in reply, that's interpreted as an attack.
Now, now, don't you agree that there are a large number of actual attacks here? If pairs of people like Gus and PLCScott ignored each other, wouldn't we have a better forum?
The simple difference (IMHO) in Bill Dayson's arguments supporting some non-RA and even unaccredited schools is that they are well researched and presented with the facts. They don't try to go to far and make blanket statements that cover far more than what the presented facts can support. Basically, I believe that Bill Dayson has had far more success in making the case for selected non-RA schools than most (any?) because his arguments have been sound, they have been presented well, and he has actually read and directly responded to the posts of others.
As an example of an unaccredited school, CCU is a favorite here. I only recall one person on this forum ever calling CCU a degree mill and that was only once, IIRC. The more general opinion seems to be that for an unaccredited school, there are few better (at least that is my opinion). Hopefully, CCU will become accredited and so provide excellent evidence that this opinion was correct.
It is very dangerous to extrapolate from one decent unaccredited school that even a good percentage of unaccredited schools are also good. The vast majority of unaccredited schools are horrible. If I had to guess a percentage for the number of unaccredited schools teaching letters and science that are close to the required academic standard, I'd guess less than 1%.
Yet there are people that I've seen apparently arguing that K-W is a good school and they were apparently totally ignorant about K-W! Their only knowledge of K-W was that they apparently felt sorry for a certain victim of K-W. Well I too feel sorry for victims of degree mills but that doesn't mean that I'm going to lie to them and tell them that their degree mill was a good school and it especially doesn't mean that I'm going to allow statements to stand unchallenged on this forum claiming that a degree mill is a good school.
Incorrect, very few posts here are made by Chip. There is no difference that I have detected in the tenor of the posts since DegreeInfo started accepting advertising. (Except for the silly argument that I'm responding to.) I have full respect for Chip and your statement that he would say things that aren't true or twist the truth in order to support RA is absurd and insulting. This silly attack against all of DegreeInfo and most of the DegreeInfo posters is not going to get people to accept your views. So I'm not sure what the purpose is except perhaps to vent?
Compared to most forums that I've visited, I believe that there are relatively few personal attacks here. (I'm not necessarily disagreeing with Mark but I'm just trying to give a different perspective.) I kind of enjoy it when Gus and plcscott don't ignore one another. I believe that the question is whether or not it gets out of hand to the point that new people might feel afraid to post?
Several people have "CLAIMED" not to be RA or no way. Time to put up or shut up. Tell us which state approved schools you have used/plan on using, have recommended/intend to recommend. Which state approved schools do you NOW advocate for use by people on degreeinfo, or are you really RA or no way?
Oh, please! YOU tell wich SA school is worthy of recommendation OVER COMPARABLE RA program. You will not find one - there is no reason to suffer utility hit, no matter how great or small. Obvious exceptions are unique programs: DL law schools, pilot school, sex school. All of wich were recommended here, and meet very little criticism.
It would be too much effort to go back through countless individual posts. So here's some threads that I've started in favor of various non-RA schools:
I named something like twenty CA-approved schools that I like in several posts on this thread, and gave reasons why:
American Military University (DETC):
The National Test Pilot School (CA-approved):
Academy of Art College (NASAD and ACICS):
Expression Center for New Media (CA-approved):
Hsi Lai University (CA-approved and WASC candidate) and the Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality (CA-approved):
Oregon approved schools:
San Francisco's Campion College (CA-approved):
Intercultural Institute of California (CA-approved and cooperation agreement with CIIS):
Here's a more dated thing about CA-approved schools:
Here's another CA-approved one that I'm not sure of, but it's striking (literally) and you might get a kick out of it (if not a bullet):
Whining about what assholes the rest of us are doesn't really help to convince people that non-RA education might have some value.
So let me put the same question to you: What have you done to promote the credibility of those non-RA schools that you apparently like so much?
Put up or shut up, James.
You did not pick any to use or recommend. Are you RA or no way?
Here are schools I would use or recommend.
Approved = CCU
DETC = AMU
Hey - I will agree.
Separate names with a comma.