President of Accredited University claims Phd from Louisiana Baptist University

From Regent Law's admission page:

Applicants should possess a bachelor's degree from an approved college or university prior to beginning their legal studies.

Emphasis mine. I'm sure that a law school understands the nuance of the word "approved" versus "accredited." So I can't imagine that this word choice wasn't deliberate. Consider also that Louisiana Baptist University appears on the Regent Law page showing colleges and universities represented by students. Of course, they also refer to this LBU graduate (now deceased) as "Doctor" pretty frequently as they showcased a presentation by her.

If these are all instances of people "slipping through the cracks" then Regent University must have an awful lot of cracks. To assume that Regent isn't fully aware that LBU has no institutional accreditation with all of this would be a bit odd.

But, hey, maybe Regent is just a pretty cracked up place.

Can you then explain why James Connelly is on the faculty of Grace University (RA) with his LBU bachelors, MA from Grace and is a doctoral candidate at Regent?

Or how Danielle Grandinetti pulled off a similar feat at Trinity International University (RA) with an LBU B.A. that clearly was enough to get her into Trinity's graduate school (and a lecturer job)?

I guess it depends upon your definition of "real." A degree, at its very basic level, is just an acknowledgment that you completed a course of study (or research). While many here conflate the terms "accredited" with "legitimate" I think that is misguided. Accrediting agencies do not authorize the award of a degree. They merely accredit the institution or program. If I have a degree from an unaccredited school, say, LBU then I have a degree from LBU. The lack of accreditation might limit the utility of that degree or it might not.

Is it "academic acceptance?" Is a school legitimate because other schools regard it as legitimate? If so, then it stands to reason that if enough accredited Christian colleges "approve" LBU then it too is "legitimate." But that's a weird way to establish legitimacy because it is based upon a circular logic (my school is legitimate because those schools say it's legitimate and they are legitimate because other schools, including mine, say it is legitimate.).

Ask yourself, if Harvard resigned its accreditation tomorrow and just said "OK, no more Title IV. We're going to rely on our reputation to continue to attract students and we're a cash only operation from now on." Would they immediatley be labeled a diploma mill? Would their credentials be worthless? It would be quite a stretch to assume that their throngs of devoted alumni would cast the school off completely on the basis of accreditation alone (a concept which most people in the private sector don't understand).

As mentioned in the Naprapathy thread, the only way into that profession is by way of two unaccredited schools (or a Swedish school of unknown accreditation status). These schools award one degree, the Doctor of Naprapathic Medicine (or Doctor of Naprapathy). Like Chiropractic this shows that a person can essentially make up a science one day and, with enough lobbying effort, eventually form your own accreditor and get it recognized by the USDOE. Does that really make your degree more "real" than it was before? What if it qualified you for licensure as the naprapathic schools do in Illinois and New Mexico? Since the state license is also "Doctor of Naprapthy/Naprapathic Medicine" is the use of that title one using an unaccredited degree or simply their license?

I'm curious to know how you know this. I know you've said you've had "interaction" with the school. What does that mean? Did you call them and discuss their degree program? Did you do consulting work for them? Were you a doctoral student at LBU until you "saw the light" and pursued studies at an accredited school?

I attended the University of Scranton. I also completed a degree at Colorado Technical University. I feel that I have a pretty solid means of comparison between the two schools in terms of general academic rigor and student expectations. It's still an imperfect comparison. I was a psych major at Scranton and a Business Management major at CTU. I only took two business courses (both of them for non-business majors) at Scranton. So, I can't really offer much of a comparison between the AACSB accredited program at Scranton to the ACBSP (which I don't believe it was when I graduated) accredited program at CTU. I can evaluate based upon my experience which is relevant to the discussion of the rigor of undergraduate studies at both schools but I wouldn't presume to tell you that their MBAs are equal in every way.

But the people who "accept" LBU degrees are likely not giving it that in-depth of an analysis. Part of it likely stems from states rights activists who are well represented in the conservative christian community. If the state of Louisiana feels that a school can award degrees, well, people who think that the states should have the final call on the matter have a point. Degree authority doesn't come from the federal government. And the only thing the federal government actually uses accreditation for (besides, at this stage, evaluating employment qualification for prospective federal employees) is access to Title IV funds. For a good number of people that's simply a non-issue. None of that means that LBU is "good" or that its degrees are of equal rigor to an accredited school. What it means is that the schools (accredited or otherwise) in this space don't care. They don't care that an anonymous PhD on a degree forum thinks their Christian brethren have bogus degrees. Many of them likely view that sort of criticism as an attack on Christianity or on their freedom of religion (neither is true, but still, that's the perception on that side of the aisle). The conservative Christian world, at least in the U.S., has always had a large number of unaccredited little "bible schools" and the more successful of them win over some sort of affiliation with accredited schools. The leadership of many of these accredited schools likely see no big issue with having their unaccredited friends walk on in. That "approval" regent speaks of is likely more theological than academic.

Outside of this world, and outside of secular employment influenced by people within this world, LBU degrees are pretty worthless. But within this world, they have value. And this "world" happens to span a pretty sizable chunk of our country and have acolytes in likely every city. Saying a degree "only" appeals to conservative Christians in the U.S. isn't as limiting as one might think.

I think you are misunderstanding my meaning here.

I'm not suggesting you, or anyone else is harassing LBU. But the subject of LBU keeps coming up and the same arguments as before seem to be raised. To you, the law adjunct is a fluke. The college president? Not sure, but you seem to be implying that he's simply a fraud. I'm sure that the latest two examples of people who used their LBU degrees to get into accredited graduate schools will similarly be written off by you because you've chosen your narrative.

I'm unsure why it is so hard to accept the fact that, in the U.S., we have a very strong "bible college culture." And that subculture transcends (or simply disregards) accreditation in many ways. It's the most reasonable explanation for the acceptance of LBU degrees and other weird situations like how the former President of Grand Canyon University claimed an unaccredited PhD from Trinity College and Seminary (alongside his accredited D.Min.). Or why the former President of Knox Theological Seminary proudly displayed his unaccredited PhD alongside his acredited D.Min. from Liberty. Though, admittedly, it doesn't address why this Wayne State Professor does something similar.

 

Neuhaus, I agree with many of your comments, I simply don't believe a handful of isolated cases legitimize unaccredited degrees.

I saw some of the LBU PhD course material: One 3-hour course required: 1) a book; 2) 15 page fill-in-the-blank work book; and 3) a 1-2 page book review.

 

I am not enrolled and do not intend to enroll. My questions to you would be how long ago this was and whether that was still the current requirement.

 

2004! I haven't looked since that time.

 

I'm going to agree with you that this doesn't legitimize LBU. In fact, I've said that throughout this thread. What I'm suggesting is that it isn't a binary choice of "legitimate" or "illegitimate." LBU is unaccredited. However, there are clearly schools that will admit students with LBU undergrad degrees to their degree programs. All of the schools identified follow a similar theology to LBU. This is where it can get hazy. If I earn a BA in Psychology, it's fairly easy to establish whether the program is worth anything. We have a general expectation of what an undergrad program psych looks like. There are established standards for what psychological education is.

When you start playing with theology it gets murky. The (non-orthodox) Jewish equivalent to the M.Div. is (generally speaking) the Master of Hebrew Letters (MHL or MAHL). If you go to the Jewish Theological Seminary, Hebrew Union College or any number of other, less well known schools, you're going to receive the MHL in addition to your rabbinical ordination. Let's look at some of the requirements for each:

From the Princeton Theological Seminary:

From Hebrew Union College:

So, for me to earn an M.Div. from Princeton it requires a three year full-time commitment. For me to earn the MAHL from HUC (and be ordained a Rabbi) you're talking about a 5 year, full time course of study (though if you are a Hebrew superstar, you might be able to test out of the year in Israel requirement taking it down to four years).

One has more requirements than the other. Legally speaking, both award you a masters degree that, for purposes of say, securing a chaplain position in the military, are considered "equivalent." But one requires three years of study and the other requires five years of study. The difference is theology. The Christian theologian, it is generally understood, is well equipped to serve as clergy with a three year M.Div. A Rabbi, however, is expected to be proficient in the Bible as well as the Talmud (which is rather expansive and complicated). If I earned the MAHL/Title of Rabbi and showed up at the door of the United Church of Christ and said "Hey, so I'd like to be a UCC Minister. As you can see, I undertook a course of study that is way more rigorous than what you normally require. So, where do I sign up?" Well, it doesn't work that way. Yeah, I likely worked harder. I definitely worked longer. I put in many more hours than the typical M.Div. student. But the theology is very different. I spent five years developing skills in a theological that, for the most part, doesn't really "carry over" to the UCC world.

The BBFI says that LBU is "legit" for teaching their brand of theology. If BBFI only had, say, two affiliated congregations then it would be pretty irrelevant. But when congregations go into the thousands the acceptability of that education is going to go pretty far. And to act surprised when LBU degrees are used in another BBFI school is a weird reaction. Of course LBU degrees are being used at BBC. What unites those two schools is not accreditation it's denominational affiliation. And if you forced BBC to choose between the two they would likely choose the latter over the former.

That doesn't mean that LBU is "legitimate." They have plenty of red flags beyond accreditation (like their foray into non-Theology degrees). Nor does it excuse the individuals who earn LBU, Trinity and other unaccredited degrees and use them in a purely secular context (like, for example, an accounting professor at a state university using a Trinity PhD in "Interdisciplinary Studies"). It's really just an acknowledgment that, when it comes to theological education, the lines are drawn more fluidly. In the doctoral context, contribution to the field of theology has different meanings across denominational boundaries. A doctoral thesis at an Orthodox seminary could very well draw confused stares and head scratching if it were presented at a Baptist seminary (and vice versa).

Two things:

1. Setting aside the fact that this was in 2004 (as I have no reason to believe that LBU would have drastically changed their program) can you expand upon how you came into possession of these materials? I don't want to make this all adversarial. But, consider how we would react if an unnamed PhD with doctorates from schools that he swears are totally legit (but will not name) came around and said "So, I reviewed LBU coursework and it is absolutely up to the standards of an accredited program." Identity aside, we'd want to know the scope of the investigation and analysis. So, why make me draw out these questions? Tell us how many courses you reviewed. Tell us how they compare to a similar course at an accredited (or reputable foreign institution).

2. Part of the Bible College culture that we have is the awarding of degrees. I, personally, disagree with it. If LBU was awarding Certificates and Diplomas in Theology and Ministry, I doubt we would all be having this discussion. A creative school could make up a credential if they needed. If the Neuhaus School of the Bible awarded a Glopthar in Sacred Theology one couldn't really say that the Neuhausian Glopthar doesn't meet the vigorous standards of other Glopathars (Glopathari?).

To that end, I feel like if this was anything other than a PhD, it would be far less controversial. Heck, it's very possible (likely) that LBU's PhD doesn't meet the standards of an accredited PhD program. And I would bet that a lot of accredited religious doctoral programs fall into the same category. The difference is that the accredited schools opt for a D.Min. or a Th.D. or a Doctor of Transformational Leadership (Bakke Graduate University offers this) instead of a PhD. So, what I would say is, just for a second, let's not compare LBU's PhD to other PhDs. Let's compare it to the doctorates at the typical TRACS school. Is it wildly off? If we compared it side by side to a doctorate from Luther Rice would we see more similarities than differences? And if so, if LBU renamed their degree say, a Doctor of Divinity, would that change your opinion of the school?

I just want to clarify that I'm not defending LBU, per se. I have no skin in the game for the LBU fight. But, I also have some fond memories of my Christian past where it wasn't uncommon to find a pastor/professor with degrees from schools of questionable accreditation. So, I have a bit of a soft spot for the purely religious degrees when they are used in a purely religious environment (including religious academia). As an HR professional, accreditation is essential. I led the charge to require USDOE accreditation for U.S. degrees at my present company. I continue to sit on the committee that reviews schools for our preferred education providers (and for our blacklist of schools we will not provide tuition assistance for). I take accreditation very seriously in the workplace. Outside of secular employment and wholly within the space of religion I can flex a bit.

For the record, the Wayne State professor with the unaccredited degree has me a bit pissed off for the reasons stated above.

My point is that I don't think we fundamentally disagree.

 

Neuhaus, I sent you a PM.

 

................................

 

Is it possible for an institution that is not legitimate to award a legitimate degree?

 

Well, I suppose it depends upon how we define "illegitimate" institutions. If it is sufficient for an institution to not possess institutional accreditation then we created a convenient category. The problem is that it stifles future development. If I ever decide to start a school I'm immediately labeled "illegitimate" no matter what I do until the day I receive accreditation. That means that my articulation agreements, my ACE recommended coursework, none of it would really matter because I lack accreditation. To a certain extend, I understand why we need some sort of imprimatur to determine that a school is "legitimate." But I think if you asked a number of people on the street (or, in absence of that, on this board) whether UofP is a "legitimate" institution they would say "no." That has less to do with their accreditation and more to do with their business practices. Does that invalidate their degrees?

If we label an institution as "illegitimate" because it sells degrees outright then no, I'd say we cannot call any degree from that school legitimate because we don't know which degrees reflect completion of coursework and which ones were simply sold.

LBU is not a paper company that flies the Louisiana flag as a flag of convenience. They aren't operated out of a post office box while being controlled by mysterious powers overseas. They have a physical location (that isn't a church) within the state. They are affiliated with a religious denomination of decent size. These things don't replace institutional accreditation. However, they give us reason to stop and say "Hey, this isn't a fly-by-night diploma mill." Add to that the handful of people who used their LBU degrees to gain admission to graduate and professional study at a small handful of similarly minded (but absolutely accredited) schools and I think you have your answer. If I earned a Th.B. from LBU and then continued on to earn my Masters and PhD from Regent University, what does that say about my LBU degree? If accredited universities are willing to host graduates of LBU offering scholarly presentations what does that say about the reception of LBU degrees in the broader Christian academic community?

Authority to award degrees does not come from accreditors. It comes from the state. We can treat that as a "formality" if we wish. Though, as I've stated elsewhere, in some states that approval process is quite rigorous and hardly a "formality." LBU operates legally. They don't try to sidestep the issue of accreditation by affiliating themselves with ASIC or with known accreditation mills. They present their status in a forthright manner. A student applying to LBU is not misled in what is being offered. If the only criticism of LBU is that their doctoral degrees are not equivalent to doctoral degrees from accredited schools then that is a quality issue not an issue, necessarily, of their legitimacy.

 

2004 is more than a decade ago and I believe LBU at one point was tightening up standards. I do not say 'did' since I certainly don't know. Do we have any more recent doctoral grads who would care to speak to current requirements. That would be helpful.

 

University faculty claiming that this was acceptable doctoral-level work were either disingenuous or incompetent. I'm not convinced that an institution can evolve out of that status by simply tightening up a bit, so the intervening 11 years don't strike me as all that significant.

 

About a year ago I reviewed an LBU PhD in Leadership course, as well as the general curriculum. There were no fill in the blank work books. The course I reviewed had 2 required texts, 5 journal articles, a long series of questions that required essay style responses, several papers of varying lengths, and some collateral reading related to the course topic that the student was free to choose within certain limits.

I compared the requirements of this course to 3 other programs, all of which offered a doctorate level leadership degree, all of which are accredited, and all of which are "bible based" institutions:

Tennessee Temple (now Piedmont), NA through TRACS, PhD in Leadership
Johnson University, RA through SACS, PhD in Leadership Studies
Bakke Graduate University, NA through TRACS, Doctor of Transformational Leadership

I found the requirements of TTU/Piedmont, Bakke, and Johnson to be substantially equal. If anything, TTU/Piedmont may have required a tad more reading and writing than the other two.

LBU, as much as I like the school, was not equal to the accredited schools. The 3 accredited schools required a bit more reading and a bit more writing, and the questions one was required to address had more depth than the LBU program. TTU/Piedmont and Johnson require traditional dissertations. Bakke takes a more "applied" approach and requires field work with a lengthy dissertation-style final project. LBU requires the student to write a book of "publishable quality."

In summary, the LBU program looks more like a pumped up master's program with a longer final project. It seems a bit beefier than some of the accredited master's programs I've seen, but not as beefy as the accredited doctorates I reviewed.

The LBU program, to me, is legitimate and does require real work, but it's not a "true" PhD. If nothing else, a "true" PhD requires a dissertation that has to be defended. I'm less concerned about the course work because, as we know, there are many schools that require only a dissertation and a successful defense.

As someone suggested earlier in this thread, I think the biggest rub here might be that LBU is referring to its offering as a PhD. If they took the Bakke route and called their doctorate degree a Doctor of Christian Leadership or something similar, it might sit better with folks.

With all of that said, I still like the LBU program and may go through it at some point. I LOVE the Bakke program, but am not sure I can justify $27k for a degree that will not have a financial ROI. We'll see.

On a final note, I believe LBU's theology and biblical studies PhD programs require a traditional dissertation and defense. It is only the PhD in Leadership that differs.

 

Nice review. Thanks Pug.

 

Thanks for that - interestingly enough, here's a thread I found in which an LBU graduate who was positive about the place assessed it as the equivalent of his accredited university's upper division undergrad or perhaps master's level programs.

http://www.degreeinfo.com/general-distance-learning-discussions/3360-louisiana-baptist-university.html

 

Thanks for the assessment. Would you say then that the PhD in Biblical Studies or Theology was equivalent to accredited PhD programs (as opposed to the Leadership PhD from the Communications Dept)?

 

I saw that thread a while back. I can't speak to what the requirements were back in 2002, but the LBU course I reviewed certainly required more than upper division undergrad classes. The poster in that thread stated that 50 pages of writing was required. In my experience, that's way more than an upper division undergrad course. I feel comfortable comparing the LBU PhD to a beefy grad program.

 

I really can't say. I've never compared LBU's Biblical Studies and/or Theology programs to accredited schools. My opinion would be purely speculative. I think it would come down to the quality of the required dissertation and its defense.

 

If LBU called their PhD an "Advanced Certificate in Theology/Biblical Studies" I would have no problem at all.