Northcentral U. achieves initial regional accreditation today

If NCA approves the nonresidency status that NCU is pursuing leading to their attaining full regional accreditation, I am fairly certain that their tuition will rise significantly.

Obviously, NCU is a profit making organization and will seek to enhance its income. Offering a nonresidency doctorate will be extremely appealing to prospective students and will be potentially very profitable.

 

This is interesting legend that is often repeated, but it's not correct. Northwestern University (which was North Western University originally) was founded in 1851, long after Illinois had become a state. The intention of the founders was to create a university for the Methodist Episcopal population in the northwestern part of the US. The Northwest territory was dissolved in the early 1800's when Indiana and Illinois gained enough population become territories in their own right. The last portion of the Northwest territory to become a state was Wisconsin in 1836.

 

Regarding the matter of whether Northcentral University might have a residential requirement imposed, I asked owner Donald Hecht, and this is his reply:

---------------------------
"There were no conditions or changes. There is absolutely no residency in
any form required. We're 100% distance non-residential at all levels
including the PhD. I can't see physical residency as an issue since it was
not even mentioned in the team report for initial candidacy (Jan 2001) and did not come up at the subsequent NCA Review Committee meeting for candidacy nor was it brough up by the NCA Board. "
-----------------------------

Theoretically it could still come up, but it surely sounds unlikely.

 

My crystal ball validates your theory... however I truly hope that we are "off" on this one... Hopefully NcU will continue to view this from a business perspective and understand that IF they increase their tuition then their student population will not be as great as it would if their tuition stayed below that of their competitors... quantity can equal greater profit...

Of course then there's also the argument that raising tuition may limit their student pool to a manageable number ensuring continued program quality...

My "big" beef with NcU is the issue of a Ph.D. in Business Administration with an emphasis in Criminal Justice Administration... Now if they dropped the "Business" part and created it as a generic administration or management degree they might be able to draw in the public sector admin and educational admin crowds too... thereby enhancing the span of their potential kingdom...

(Hey, NcU... are you listening???)

I just perceive a significant disconnect between business admin and criminal justice admin... and if the tuition raises significantly I would forgo this opportunity to excel in search of another...

Bruce P

 

If the foregoing is, in fact, true, I find it more interesting that Northwestern would perpetuate this legend on its web site by stating, "Northwestern University is a private institution founded in 1851 to serve the Northwest Territory".

 

It is possible that in time, possibly after attaining full RA, NCU may review and consequently expand several of its doctoral programs. For instance, they currently have a doctoral program in three areas of psychology, none of which have a clinical focus and do not prepare one for state licensure. In addition, in the discipline of Professional Psychology, the courses involving assessment and testing and advanced counseling/therapy interventions, require face to face instruction that cannot be achieved through remote internet learning. NCU may need to come to grips with this issue if they ever wish to offer clinically oriented doctoral degrees to successfully compete with the "big four DL universities". The issue of whether having a required residency as an intrinsic part of the doctoral program in psychology results in greater credibility and acceptance in professional psychology of an online degree, is yet another issue that needs to be considered

Furthermore, it would not be surprising if they expanded their business management degrees to encompass other professional areas, such as criminal justice. We'll see!

 

You can do a business administration degree at NCU with a criminal justice administration concentration. The program is definitely business-focused, so hopefully they'll offer a true CJ degree in the future.


Bruce

 

Simon,
What about a general psych degree from NCU and a Clinical Psych specialization from Feilding? Would that be cost effective and meet APA's requirements for licensure?????

 

And to think, both Dr. Bear and Rich Douglas strongly stated that NCU wouldn't gain anything more from the accreditation process than the experience of completing the application. Both individuals stated that more than any other reason, NCU would not gain accreditation due to it's affliation with SCUPS.

Maybe the accreditation process is no longer the political game that Dr. Bear and Mr. Douglas understood [it] to be?

 

Wes,

Does this mean that a SCUPS degree is now a good option?

 

One can feel comfortable that SCUPS provides the same education that NCU provides. This can be proven by the self-study completed by NCU during the NCA accreditation process. I have a copy of the self-study -- as does Rich Douglas, since I emailed a copy to him -- which describes NCU to be nothing more than SCUPS operating with another name and in another location -- AZ.

Good education or not, SCUPS is not accredited and therefore any SCUPS degree will have limited utility. I do not agree with the US accreditation concept but was forced to abandon Cal Coast --due to a professional certification code of ethics issue -- and transfer to ACCS, which BTW has been the best institution overall of the three -- Northcentral, CCU and ACCS -- which I have experienced.

CCU was California approved, which I thought was sufficient evidence of quality until it was called to my attention that one of my professional certifications would not permit me -- ethically -- to represent my CCU degree. Northcentral was excellent in all ways except the format of study and as it turns out the rigidity versus what I've experienced with ACCS.

Back to my original point, if the accreditation process was not so political maybe more unaccreditated colleges would successfully gain accreditation.

You see, Bear and Douglas had nothing to base their professional opinion on in regard to NCU gaining or being denied accreditation than the fact that NCU was owned and operated by SCUPS. This to them meant that NCA would never accredit NCU. These two professional opinions support the idea that the accreditation process is nothing more than who you know, who you are affliated with, and/or how much money you donate to the accreditor.

 

That may or may not be the case. The question is: how can we know that, if SCUPS has declined to undergo credible outside QA assessment?

But the North Central Association examined NCU and not SCUPS. We still only have the word of SCUPS' owners that NCU and SCUPS are equivalent. I really doubt if the NCA made any attempt to verify that claim.

Your conclusion is a non-sequitur, isn't it?

My opinion is that a small number of CA-approved schools are reasonably good. That's illustrated by the fact that a few of them go on to receive recognized accreditation periodically.

But that's precisely the point. We *don't know* how good a particular school is until we receive some concrete evidence. A credible party has gotta check it out, or its gotta produce some academic accomplishments.

I'm still not ready for these leaps of faith.

 

I'm not trying to speak for Bear or Douglas. For myself, the issue is that best predictor of future performance is past performance. If someone in the past has started up a degree mill then it's a fairly safe assumption to guess that any future enterprises will also be of marginal academic quality.

I consider the above to be a simple statement of fact. It appears that you then make the apparent wild leap in logic that the accreditation process must be corrupt. This has got to be ridiculous beyond belief. My apologies if I've misunderstood your argument.

 

Mr. or Ms. Cox: "[You see, Bear['s...] professional opinion [was that] that NCA would never accredit NCU."

I never said that. I said I thought it unlikely, but things that I think unlikely happen every 20 minutes.

It also seems unlikely to me that SCUPS and NCU operate identically. I would be quite confident that NCU never offered to sell a degree to an undercover reporter (as SCUPS did, according to Spy Magazine), or that NCU distributed pages ostensibly from my book but altered to make the school write-up more favorable (as SCUPS did).

And isn't it delicious that NCU will not accept credit transfers from SCUPS -- and will not even accept degrees or credit transfers from the DETC-accredited American Military University (according to the article on credit transfer in last week's Chronicle of Higher Education).

Mr. or Ms. Cox: "These two professional opinions support the idea that the accreditation process is nothing more than who you know, who you are affliated with, and/or how much money you donate to the accreditor."

Now I'm confused. Is Mr.or Ms. Cox saying that he believes it is NOT the case that money buys accreditation but that silly Bear says it is, or that he/she believes that money DOES buy accreditation.

The former is untrue; the latter would be such astounding news as to make page one news in the Chronicle if there were any evidence of its truth.

 

Dr. Bear, I spoke with you personally (over the phone) and you told me never to enroll in NCU because you didn't believe NCU would ever gain RA. When asked why? you replied, "more than any single factor, NCU was owned and operated by SCUPS and you believed that this relationship was enough to cripple NCU" or something to this very effect. I understand why you don't remember speaking with me, but it's not everyday that I speak with a perceived DL authority.

Rich on the other hand has posted public remarks on AED, and About.com regarding his opinion that NCU would not gain RA due to the SCUPS connection.


I am of the opinion that if an upstart institution met the basic requirements for RA plus donated $500K to the accreditor the overall process would be smooth sailing and the upstart would end up with RA.

Dr. Bear, I've come to believe that you say whatever is politically correct and will enhance your chances of selling more books ($$$$$$$$$) and of course the sale of more books creates greater exposure for you, which inturn creates speaking engagements (more $$$$$$$$$$$$$) -- get the picture. I know you do, you see it in the mirror everyday!


Regards, Wes

 

Has Anything Changed?

It was also brought to your attention (as previously discussed in this thread), that a degree from ACCS (for the purposes of referring to yourself as “doctor”) would also violate the Code of Professional Ethics of the American Counseling Association, the Commission on Rehabilitation Counseling Certification, as they only recognize degrees from schools with regional accreditation. Back in May of this year, when you were apprised of this fact, you stated that you intended, “to inform the CRCC of my intention to use the title Dr. in front of my name and CRC behind my name.” Moreover, you acknowledged that you were aware of the violation of the Codes of Ethics and asserted that you intended to sue your professional association to force them to change their Code of Professional Ethics.

• ”I will look CRCC and the others in the eye and challenge them to make issue of it. Maybe [they] do and maybe they don't, and if so quite possibly legislative precedent will be made. However, I am quite certain this will be an issue long settled before I earn my degree as this affects too many other CRC's.”

So, has this important issue, which you claimed affected many other CRCs, been settled? Have you advised the CRCC of your intention to use the title "doctor" and the CRC designation? Have they granted you an exemption form their Code of Professional Ethics, or have you sued them as promised? Were you successful in forcing a professional association (in which membership is voluntary), to change their Code of Professional Ethics to better suit your needs?

As you continue to pursue a degree from ACCS, one can only surmise that this issue has been resolved in your favor. If so, this would be interesting news, as the CRCC did not change the rules on you after the fact; it was you who made a premeditated decision to pursue a degree the use of which you were fully aware violated their Code of Professional Ethics.

 

With all due respect, this is nonsense. No recognized accreditors accept donations from applicant institutions. However, I do believe politics play an important role in the RA process. Hire only administrators from other RA schools and do only what other RA schools do and the process will be smoother. It’s much like joining a country club. Look and think like everyone else and you’ll be accepted.

NCU chose to take a more difficult innovative approach and apparently they have been successful. They deserve our praise. But two years ago even some high NCU officials had serious concerns about their accreditation prospects. I don’t see how Dr. Bear can be fairly criticized for stating his candid opinion based on the facts available to him at that time.

 

IIRC, my main concern was the lack of residency in the doctoral programs. That was the subject of a gentleman's wager between you and I. I may have expressed some concerns about the co-ownership of SCUPS, but it was residency we discussed most.

While I've been willing to admit when I'm wrong, I don't really appreciate being "called out" like this. Perhaps if you stuck to your own opinions instead of trying to describe mine, we'd both be better off.

 

I never said anything remotely like this. I'm not sure why you are choosing to unilaterally flame me or Bear, but it certainly seems a violation of the TOS.

BTW, my opinions are not "professional." I'm not paid to make them, nor have I claimed otherwise. Anything else you feel compelled to distort?