No longer care if the degree is RA

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Bantockesq, Dec 3, 2014.

  1. bceagles

    bceagles Member

    I hate to start new threads for existing conversations.

    I think it's best to search for a topic and reopen the discussion.

    My thought is that the original posters will reengage in the discussion and the rest of the forum will help with updated information.

    Let me know if this is poor forum etiquette. Thanks!
  2. Chip

    Chip Administrator

    Generally speaking, if a thread is more than a few months old, and is personal to a user’s experience (as this thread is), it is better to start a new thread. Unlikely the OP is even still in the decision process on a topic like this 3+ years later.

    Now... if you have new info on a general topic (such as a school or degree program or something) then continuing on an old bread can make sense.
  3. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    I can't see dates for anything under the new format. Unless I'm mistaken, they appear UNDER a poster's sig line. And on my screen they aren't regular color, they are light watermarks. The reason I deleted my comments, is that when I went back, I realized they were duplicating those I made 4 years ago lol.
  4. Ian Anderson

    Ian Anderson Active Member

    Take some DSST tests - some of their tests may upper-division credit.
    Abner likes this.
  5. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    Stick with RA degrees if you can. I say that as someone who has both RA and NA diplomas. You can go to one of the big three and pay as you go.
  6. Neuhaus

    Neuhaus Well-Known Member

    The only place where I feel a person may be legitimately disadvantaged by an Na degree is if that degree is their primary undergrad degree. My ex is a social worker with an MSW and a BSW from B&M RA schools. Then she went and got the PF associates in Early Childhood Ed because she wanted to shift to working with kids and thought it might help. It did. It spruced up her resume nicely. Could she have accomplished the same another way? Absolutely. Could she have avoided more education and just used her MSW to get where she wanted to be? Yeah, probably. But it was cheap and if it helps you land that first job in the field you want, it may well be worth it.

    If you have an RA undergrad and an NA grad degree employers are unlikely to care unless it affects licensure.

    The reality of the situation is that there is no objective reason why NA should be inferior aside from the fact that, for many years, NA accreditors didn’t accredit degrees above the associates level. From a transfer standpoint, it isn’t the end of the world of a four year RA school won’t accept credit transfers from your two year NA AAS. It gets much dicier when it comes down to not being able t9 get into a graduate program with your NA bachelors.

    I totally understand betting against NA degrees. I feel that what will happen in the long term is that either NA will disappear from the landscape entirely or, more likely, it is going to continue to gain ground. Ashworth has a Georgia approval for their RN to BSN program. Everest has programmatic accreditation for nursing. Grantham has ABET accreditation for one of its programs. And PMI, though not CHEA recognized, is recognized by a number of employers who are really into the PMP and a few NA schools are accredited by PMI as well. These are major leaps forward for NA.

    Legally, accreditation is accreditation at the federal level. The states went a bit further by sometimes limiting licensing and employment (for state employees) to RA programs. These are very often administrative decisions that can change over time. And almost all states carve out an exception for non-RA programs that are approved by that state’s education department.

    NA schools don’t have to overcome very many legal hurdles. The obstacles to broader NA acceptance lie in the absence of programmatic accreditation, lack of participation in the student clearinghouse (which many employers use for degree verification), limits to licensing opportunities and graduate admissions. Employer perception follows school reputation much more than accreditation.

    None of those obstacles are insurmountable. Will NA schools rise to the challenge? Maybe. Some seem keen on getting there while others use NA only as a stepping stone to RA. For the individual student the question is very simple, is this degree likely to enable me to achieve my goals? That might be as basic as getting that promotion or as complex as a massive career change years down the road. But this is a question for RA students as well. Getting an RA bachelors degree in accounting is no guarantee that you’ll be eligible for the CPA exam. In New York, you could have an RA but not AACSB, bachelors degree and be at a significant advantage against a student with an NA, but approved by the board of accountancy in New York to be CPA qualifying, bachelors degree.

    Accreditation was supposed to make it easier for a student to know if this school and it’s programs pass muster. The reality is more complicated. And people are beginning to realize that. RA was once seen as bulletproof accreditation. Recently we’ve seen calls for HLC to lose its recognition. People are pissed. Worse, they are ignorant of the accreditation landscape. So there will probably be changes on the horizon but they are likely to be inconsistent and create even more confusion than there is now

    Why choose NA? That isn’t the question. At least, that isn’t a good question. The question should be why should I choose this program. Accreditation should definitely be a part of the decision making process. However, it shouldn’t be the only component. “It’s got accreditation!” Is the sales tag line that has led to many of our current woes. Accreditation should be a necessary, but not sufficient, reason for choosing a program.
    miebrown2 and sideman like this.

Share This Page