Petersons and Non-accredited Schools

The Chronicle of Higher Education has a news item about Petersons' listing non-accredited programs on their on-line site:
http://www.chronicle.com/free/2001/04/2001041801u.htm

Some highlights:

A Petersons representative verifies that Petersons is now collecting information on non-accredited as well as accredited programs, but says that the accredited programs will not be listed in print versions of their existing guides. He did say that they are considering publishing a new guide listing them.

Apparently this is causing some concern in the higher education community, and a number of universities which now pay advertising fees for expanded listings in the Petersons guides say that they will no longer do so if Petersons continues listing non-accredited schools.

 

In my opinion the best policy for Peterson's is to continue to list only accredited programs. That leaves thems as a reliable source. They have been fair in terms of listing all recognized colleges and universities which are either nationally or regionally accredited. For example, both Luther Rice Seminary & American Bible College and Seminary (TRACS accredited) are listed. To dive into the world of schools which lack accreditation may not only affect their (Peterson's) advertising revenue but also lead to issues for students of quality and the appearance of endorsement of credibility for unaccredited programs.

To sum up.....Peterson's should stay away from unaccredited schools!

North

 

In my opinion the best policy for Peterson's is to continue to list only accredited programs. That leaves them as a reliable source. They have been fair in terms of listing all recognized colleges and universities which are either nationally or regionally accredited. For example, both Luther Rice Seminary & American Bible College and Seminary (TRACS accredited) are listed. To dive into the world of schools which lack accreditation may not only affect their (Peterson's) advertising revenue but also lead to issues for students of quality and the appearance of endorsement of credibility for unaccredited programs.

To sum up.....Peterson's should stay away from unaccredited schools!

North

 

Can't say I really blame them! Isn't one objective of achieving recognized accreditation to provide a stamp of quality assurance? To bring legitimacy to an institution's degree programs, and provide the student with a respected and marketable credential?

Perhaps these institutions can use their monetary leverage and influence Peterson's to stop advertising unaccredited schools. Or at least to do so in a totally separate volume like "Peterson's Guide to Unaccredited Schools." At least in this manner it would be known up front that the schools were unaccredited.

My hunch is that the unaccredited schools desire to be listed in Peterson's Guide with no mention of the fact that they are unaccredited, as this would appear to give legitimacy to the school.

So I certainly understand why the RA schools would not like the fact that unaccredited schools are advertised alongside their own ads. Much as a Ph.D. from UCLA would probably not like the fact that a Ph.D. from the University of San Moritz was perceived as equal to his/her own.

Russell

 

I recently purchased Petersons DL book and found that Southern California University for Professional Studies are listed. SCUPS are CA state approved and *not* regionally accredited.

Eli