Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Johann, Jan 11, 2017.
Please read before posting your reply!!
It's important that you understand the people at this site are highly knowledgeable about schools and accreditation matters. Aside from the occasional posts where a person responds in an unnecessarily nasty way, the type of responses you're going to get here will be totally honest (and helpful). Try not to take offense to it. Instead, look at it as free professional advice from people who have been around the block and back in this realm.
Now, let me tell you all the issues I see with this school:
1. The name. It just lacks any sort of ring to it. I couldn't imagine saying to someone, "You should really consider I-I-C-S-E University!" and not expecting them to furl their brow at me and then ask me "what does IICSE mean?"
2. It's strange that your grading system jumps from 3.0 to 5.0. That honestly doesn't make any sense to me. 5.0 GPA scales are uncommon in the United States. In general, we stop at 4.0.
3. You have a lot of programs, but no mention of faculty. Who is teaching all of these programs? What are their credentials? People need to know that information to feel secure about studying with the school.
4. Credit amounts are way overboard. For instance, your Associate degree in Nursing is 120 credits (roughly double what is normal), and it seems like there are far more classes than normal.
5. You're claiming accreditation from an outfit that is not an accreditor. HUGE red flag.
6. The slogan is so benign and generic. "A liberal arts education". That's not even a real slogan.
7. I've seen far worse sites, but IICSE's isn't built very well. It looks like something from the early 2000's. I also notice that some of the bottom links change based on the page you go to, so whoever built this site forgot to copy each page over as he/she worked.
8. The site says:
What is the full meaning of the acronym IICSE?
IICSE is NOT an abbreviation of words. IICSE is an entity and a famous educational
brand name. We are fully and officially registered as “IICSE University, Inc.”. Again,
IICSE is a one-word brand name. It’s not an abbreviation of words. .
Oh, lord. That makes the name even worse. It's just a succession of five letters that mean nothing. Wow. What the heck are you guys thinking?
9. The site says:
If I register on Nursing, Computer Science/Engineering, et cetera, how can I deal with practical aspect?
As part of our requirements, students enrolling on any of the practical-based programs are expected to undergo "Industrial Work Experience Learning Scheme" with organizations or learning institutions in their various localities. For instance, if you are enrolling on Nursing, then you'd be required to do Industrial Work Experience Learning Scheme (IWELS) with health centers, hospitals or clinics.
If you are enrolling on Computer Science/Engineering, then you will be required to do IWELS with Computer Schools or ICT Institutes, et cetera. IICSE Official "Letter of Introduction" will be issued to students on practical-based programs to enable the students to apply to organizations or learning institutions, the letter is issued on request.
The Nursing boards will eventually swoop down on you like starving vultures to a fresh carcass. A hospital will take one look at the student's information, recognize that IICSE is not accredited by any Nursing authority, they will make contact with a Nursing authority, and in no time they will be lobbying to have you shut down in Delaware. Ticking time bomb.
Personally, I have no issue with Nursing and Medicine being available at the non-licensing level, just as long as it's communicated by the school that the degree cannot be used for licensure, and that the student understands that they can never become licensed with the degree. The problem is, schools that do this rarely communicate licensure issues, and some nuts actually try to use these degrees to fool people.
10. The site is not secure. There is no encryption system for the login page! RUN!!!
I'll stop there. Here is what IICSE needs to do:
- Change that name to something more appealing. IICSE may be the worst name I've ever heard, not even because it sounds the worst but because it makes no sense and means nothing.
- List your Professors and their credentials (searching the net, I was only able to find this: https://www.udemy.com/user/marciarpinheiro/ ) - She lists on her LinkedIn profile that she started and finished both a Masters AND a Doctorate with IICSE in the SAME year! HUGE... RED... FLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG!!!
- Consider changing the grading system to a 4 point system.
- Nations University had to learn this as well: 3 credit system, not 5.
- Invest in a secure encryption system. If you don't, it's only a matter of time until some nut/disgruntled student wreaks havoc on your program.
- Apply for ASIC 'accreditation'. I think I'm going to start recommending that to every school like this as a starting point. If a school can't get ASIC accreditation or gets stripped of it shortly after obtaining it, then you know there is no hope at all for that school going forward.
... but even after all of that, I still think this is a complete mess that can't be fixed. The number of red flags just points to it being a diploma mill, especially knowing that a graduate and faculty member started and finished a Masters and a Doctorate in the same year! No matter how intelligent a person is, a legitimate program requires a longer time period for completion. What a mess.
Wow! You ought to get a consultation fee for that.
Thank you for the detailed and informative review!!!
For what it's worth, I might agree this is a little odd-sounding by American standards, but not internationally.
As real experts here (that classification obviously does not include me) have told us repeatedly, ASIC has no remit - i.e. is essentially meaningless - outside of UK. ASIC itself says on its web page that its accreditation does not have anything to do with degree-granting authority. The school has the authority given by its own country - or it doesn't. ASIC has given accreditation to (and later yanked it from) at least three schools linked by the media to the Pakistani Mega-scam, "Axact." - Orlando University, California Paramount University and University of Atlanta. One of those schools (Orlando U.) has never, to my knowledge, had a physical location, other than cyberspace. I wonder where the ASIC site-visit took place? (This Orlando U. is not the same Orlando U. that was once a DEAC applicant and, I believe, continues to offer legal, though unaccredited, programs).
I got mildly smirked at by a couple of other DI members for suggesting that ASIC has made "mistakes" by accrediting these schools. Rightly so. What was I thinking? Other (non-Axact linked) have acquired ASIC accreditation and gone on to failure or non-tsater status - e.g. Excel College. We have a long thread on that one. Since California (BPPE) passed its accredit-or-die legislation , some schools have wrapped themselves in ASIC to avoid the axe. Doesn't seem to be working - RECOGNIZED accreditation only, says the State.
You yourself have said, in another post that ASIC is a "gray area." I think that's delusional, unless you consider meaningless and unrecognized (neither RA nor NA) - or worse, i.e. seal of approval for Axact schools, to be the new gray.
If you must recommend unrecognized accreditation (not a good idea EVER, as I see it) maybe you might think of ACI. Just as meaningful but cheaper, from what I hear. Here's a recent ACI thread -started by the owner.
"non-tsater status" = sorry, I meant non-starter status. And as to ASIC not conferring degree granting authority - no accreditation does that - not its job. But I have seen unscrupulous schools nudge and wink their way into making prospects believe that their unrecognized accreditation -whatever the brand - does exactly that. I can't blame ASIC for what any school does - but that fact doesn't help any.
I don't know who is a "real expert" here and who isn't (or what that has to do with anything) and I'm really not concerned with it because that's subjective and I have my own professional experience to draw from and I'm quite confident in that expertise as I should be after years of working for it. My suggestion was partly tongue-in-cheek anyway. We're all well aware that ASIC has no standing in the United States, but that's beside the point. The point I was making is that if they can't get past the low standards of ASIC then they might as well pack up and head for the hills. I have no issues with a startup using them as a starting point as they do have SOME standards and they do boot schools from time to time, despite their past blunders (like the Axact situation which they did correct). I think ACI would be a worse choice because unlike ASIC I don't get the impression that ACI's intent was to ever do any good besides making money by picking up where a previous fraud left off. At least ASIC was started on good intent in cooperation with the UK Government and has made some efforts to improve in the past few years.
The one thing that does concern me at times about this forum is how unforgiving some can be toward schools and accreditors outside the regionally accredited non-profit realm to the point that issues outside that arena are sometimes magnified in ways that aren't entirely fair and balanced.
That's kind of what I was getting at from the American side, because it appears that they are desiring to gain within the American market. The name is an issue for this market by itself, but then you throw in the fact that it's a group of letters with no meaning and Americans will almost certainly scratch their heads about it and become suspicious when they find out that it doesn't mean anything.
I look at the school from the graduate point of view. The utility of the final product .
One can get education for free from best universities in the world via EDX, Cursera, etc and many other MOOP's or simply Youtube and library.
The degree is the final product and its utility is a major factor in earning it. How sad it is when graduates find the hard way that utility is very low or limited.
I'm not saying that NU is the case, just, in general, any university that has nonstandard recognized accreditation (USDOE, CHEA, or equivalent) needs to take into the account the possible limitations of the utility of the degree.
My employer is not accepting anything but RA or equivalent, my wife's employer accepts only RA or NA degrees.
The following states in the US (there could be more) have or had in the past strict laws about the usage of degrees that have no recognized accreditation (RA, NA or equivalent by recognized agency or evaluator like members of NACES):
So the sooner NU earns recognized accreditation the better is for their students and graduates.
I meant IICSE U
Life is neither fair nor balanced. And as for the unforgiving views , in this case, fair or not (another subjective assessment) they are at least deserved. IICSE's "campus" has been traced to a shopping plaza in Abuja, Nigeria. It appears to share quarters with the nonexistent university, Springfield U., and some very risky websites and faked names. Read the first page or two again and you'll see.
Then I guess you don't need experts, assuming your professional experience includes a concentration in matters of accreditation and university standards. From reading your posts, I think there's a lot you could learn about those topics , in - say fifteen more years of reading this forum. You'd know by then who the experts are. They are comparatively few, but they are there. Start with 2001.
Eleyi jẹ kan egbin ti akoko. (This is a waste of time). That's Yoruba - the IICSE guy's native language. My take: any outfit that accredits even ONE fraud-linked school for so much as FIVE MINUTES ... you can fill in the blanks or not, as you choose.
I don't care whether you think that's "fair" or not. I think it's the only sane approach.
IMO a school without a proper accreditation is simply useless.
I will not go to a university seeking practical knowledge. I've seen crappy curriculum from top-ranking schools. I go to a university for a degree - a paper that makes sense to an employer.
If I want knowledge, there are multiple source as mentioned in other posts.
So this school in question, even if it's free (which is not) simply doesn't make any sense to me.
The International Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, QAHE, accredits or has accredited Pebble Hills University, Kesmonds International University (in Wilmington, Delaware), Selinus University of Science and Literature, London Graduate School and Commonwealth University.
Among the affiliates of Commonwealth University are Aldersgate University, London Graduate School and St Clements University and Commonwealth University holds additional accreditation from IADL, the International Association for Distance Learning and Unesco. Not the real Unesco though, but Dr Daniel Esteban Odin's Union Nacional de Education Superior Continua Organizada.
In theory, and generally speaking, a degree from a school with no recognized accreditation should have no utility. However, I don't think there was ever a disagreement on utility.
As for NU (Nexford University?)... I thought we were discussing IICSE? EDIT: I see you caught that
Life is neither fair nor unfair, it is simply a state of existence, it cannot have a moral position. But this isn't about "life", this about the positions being taken on how some institutions operate.
People do however have moral positions, and any person with a shred of integrity should strive to be fair and balanced in everything they do, otherwise they are not honest well-meaning human beings and are really just making the world a worse place for everyone else. Unfairness and unbalance are not virtues.
This is perfect proof of you having missed the point. I'm unconcerned with those things because I have never said IICSE is a viable university, and reading what I wrote should've made that very obvious to you as I'm sure it's obvious to most who read it... I couldn't have possibly been any clearer...
Johann, stop kidding yourself. From reading your posts (this one alone), I can say that I've forgotten more about accreditation and university standards since my morning urination than you've known about the topic combining all years of your life, and my experience in the past near decade has been done hands-on, you've done nothing hands-on in this arena you've only posted on this forum, so I get a good laugh out of that quote. Besides that, your entire response here is based on you misunderstanding my point, a simple point, which I explained to you already and you apparently still don't get it or like it or whatever. I'm not asking you to like it, I couldn't care less, the post wasn't for you.
And it's a good thing you don't do this for a living because you would make a complete mess, shooting mosquitoes with bazookas. That's not how to operate. If you were at all aware of how many fraudulent activities have happened over the years where accreditors (national AND regional) turned a blind eye to or handled with kid gloves schools involved in selling degrees to foreigners without them having earned them, or accrediting programs without the adequate means to provide students the proper education, or any number of other accreditation violations, then you would know how many accreditors you currently hold in high esteem would fall under the criteria you just set. This is why being fair and balanced is indispensable, because left up to people like you, it would be a bloodbath, no one would be left standing, and no one would be able to redeem themselves. If you think ASIC is the only one who has made big blunders, then you are very, VERY wrong.
Nobody is saying that mistakes shouldn't be dealt with and even punished, nor is anyone saying that they should be forgotten, but every operation should have an opportunity to redeem itself and move forward. If you were to use the same approach you proposed with every accreditor it would be one bloody field. Maybe being fair and balanced is not what you're about, and that's your own personal ethics, I won't ever join you in that. I believe in having honor and integrity, and being fair and balanced is part of that.
I have nothing more to say to you on this matter.
Separate names with a comma.