Question about standards for degree programs.

There is one word in (1) (b) that you left out in your analysis. It is "AND". That one word makes your view inaccurate. When "AND" is used in a sentence, all of the description applies, not just one. If you look at the entire sentence...

(1) (b) Provided, operated, AND supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government

So, they may be supported by the state government in your argument, but they definitely aren't provided by the state government or operated by the state government.

BTW, in my opinion, SUPPORTED means receiving state funds. Just because they aren't outlawed or there are regulations that they follow, doesn't mean they are supported. It might mean they are allowed to operate, but I wouldn't call it support.

 

If the above term is a part of a statute, it implies that all items should be in comply with statutory requirements. Therefore, provided, operated and supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government should be referred to provisions and operations of statutory requirements of the state or Federal Government! For example, an unaccredited university is PROVIDING and OPERATING degree programs with SUPPORT by BPPVE of CA state government if it adheres to all requirements of the law of CA. Therefore, its degree programs are still valid and official, even if it is unaccredited. In fact, accreditation in USA is voluntary but state approval is A MUST if the university wishes to operate its programs in CA. I think similar laws should apply to other states.

Actually, SUPPORTED should not be deemed ONLY for receiving state funds since a lot of institutions whether they are accredited or unaccredited may not get funds from the government.

If we revise the above term again and assume a university is without approval from the state government, provided, operated and supported ... (or similar wordings) WILL be void for such university. In this case, it will breach this term of 1(b).

When we interpret the terms of a statute, we need to consider the meaning of them from the legal ground at first. Equity and reasonableness will be the first priority in drafting a statutory term. For this case, under the principle of equity and resaonableness, if a university does not get approval to operate its programs from its state government, i.e. unaccredited and disapproved, it is reasonable other state governments will not accept its program.

Therefore, it should be fine to use state approved degree in other states legally, while its academic standards may be justified by other means, e.g. accreditation.

 

As per the FDLE - in order to receive salary incentive money in and from the State of Florida ($40.00 AA or AS & $80.00 BA or BS) on a monthly basis ALL degrees MUST come from an RA school - NO EXCEPTIONS!

 

I disagree. You are definitely misinterpreting this statute. BTW, I may not be a lawyer, but I am a Quality Engineer. In my job, I deal with phrasing of standards all of the time.

Let's break this down entirely. "(1) No person shall claim...to possess an academic degree...been awarded said degree from an institution that is;"

The above means that a person can't claim a degree unless it meets (1) (a) or (1) (b) or (1) (c) or (1) (d) or (1) (e). The institution has to meet one of the five descriptions.

Now, let's look at (1) (a). "Accredited by a regional or professional accrediting agency..."

In order to meet (1) (a), a school must be regionally accredited OR professionally accredited. A professional accreditation would be something like ABET for electronics and technology or AACSB for business schools.

(1) (b)Provided, operated, and supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government;

Let's examine this. A private institution like St. Leo's University, is not provided by the state government or any of its political subdivisions. Also, St. Leo's is not provided by the Federal government. It is a private institution. It wasn't provided by the state. An institution provided by the state would be one that was started by state mandate. For instance, the establishment of a state university. Let's look at the word "operated". St. Leo's is a private institution. It's not operated by the state. There aren't people appointed by the state government to oversee the operations of St. Leo's. University of Florida, on the other hand, is quite different. UF is operated by a Board of Trustees.

"The UF Board of Trustees is the public body corporate of the university. It sets policy for the institution, and serves as the institution's legal owner and final authority. The UF Board of Trustees holds the institution's resources in trust and is responsible for their efficient and effective use. The UF Board of Trustees consists of six citizen members appointed by the Governor and five citizen members appointed by the Board of Governors. The Chair of the Faculty Senate and the President of the Student Body are also voting members." - UF Website

I don't believe that was the intention of the statute, but we'll assume it to be so. Let's say that St. Leo's is supported by the state government, because the law allows it to operate. St. Leo's still fails the provisions of (1) (b) by the arguments presented above because it is not operated by the state government. However, St. Leo's meets the statute because it is regionally accredited and therefore meets (1) (a).

Let's assume for a minute that a new institution is established by the Georgia University System and it is called Georgia Southeastern Institute of Technology. It may take a few of years to be accredited by a regional agency. However, since GSIT is provided and operated by the state (and was more than likely provided funds by the state), a degree from GSIT before it was accredited would be valid in Florida because it meets (1) (b).

Kennedy-Western, on the other hand, wasn't started by whatever state it is operating out of now. It is a private institution. It isn't operated by a state and it isn't provided by a state. Therefore, Kennedy-Western doesn't meet the standard of (1) (b). Since K-W doesn't meet the standard of (1) (a) or (1) (c) or (1) (d) or (1) (e). A K-W degree would not be valid in Florida.

BTW, to any K-W fans, I'm not picking on K-W. I just chose it because it is fairly well-known and at this time not regionally accredited to the best of my knowledge.

In another point, not all states have the same laws. So, one state may approve of a degree, or inherently approve of a degree by not outlawing it's use, and another state is free to reject that degree. There are many examples throughout U.S. history where something was legal in one state and illegal in another.

 

In my reading, it says only regional or professional accreditation (which does not include national accreditation). So, possibly. Personally, I think Florida can be kind of backwards about these things. See some of simon's old threads. DISCLAIMER: I am not a licensed attorney, nor do I play one on degreeinfo.

 

However, the criteria is are that the institution is PROVIDED, OPERATED, and SUPPORTED by the state. So, you simply re-arrange the wording a bit, plus you re-arrange the meaning of one of those words quite significantly.

 

You expect the law to be reasonable in Florida?

 

The Florida statute was ruled unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court because it disallowed the use of bona fide standard level degrees which deprieved holders of those degrees the right to use their degree.

I didn't mention this earlier because the next question would be what year and the case number for the ruling, etc.. I don't have any of that information. Sorry.

 

You are right in that the next question is what year and case number.

Since the statute quoted is from the 2006 Florida Statutes, it would have to be from this year. I searched the Florida Supreme Court Opinions for 2006 and could not find anything. However, that doesn't mean that I didn't miss it.

Of course the Supreme Court may have overturned an earlier version of the law in an earlier year. However, to the best of my knowledge, the current statute is valid.

When the 2006 Florida Statutes are published, it means that all current statutes and any legislative changes to the statutes that are effective up to and including January 1, 2007 are considered current.

 

Did you refer this St. Leo University at http://www.saintleo.edu? It seems having a lot of accreditations, including PROGRAMS APPROVAL BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT. Pls see http://www.saintleo.edu/SaintLeo/Templates/inner.aspx?pid=141.

Therefore, it should HAVE people appointed by the state government of Florida and other accredited bodies to oversee the operations of this university. It should meet the requirements of BOTH (1)(a) and (1)(b)!

If you are not referring to this university, pls provide its related website for reference.

Let's back to below term again. I believe below term is allowed degrees of other state approval universities using in Florida. If Florida only allows regional accredited degrees using in the state, ONLY (1)(a) is enough and (1)(b) is unnecessary.

(1) (b)Provided, operated, and supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government;

Also, provided, operated and supported do not mean the university is owned or financial control by the government. As described in your case of St. Leo's, it depends on whether people are appointed by the state government to oversee the operations of the university or not. Please see the website of BPPVE at http://www.bppve.ca.gov/index.html and find the paragraph of :

The Bureau establishes educational standards that are intended to serve as the minimum standard for instructional quality and institutional stability for private postsecondary schools in California. The Bureau responds to student complaints and oversees a fund designed to help reimburse a student's tuition if a school closes unexpectedly. The Bureau is also responsible for approving education and training programs for veterans.

In other words, all state approval universities of CA under control of BPPVE are regularly inspected by personnels of BPPVE, a subdivision of CA State Government. Therefore, degree offered of the institutions under BPPVE is provided, operated and supported by the State government under Article 8 of the Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education Reform Act, CA (A Statute of CA). So, they all are recognized in CA State.

When you search any institution of BPPVE, you can find the degree programs of all institutions are evaluated under the above Article. Try to click this link as example: https://app.dca.ca.gov/bppve/school-search/view-school.asp?schlcode=0100591. It implies personnels of BPPVE have already inspected the institution to comply with Article 8 or not for granting degree programs.

Under the law concepts of substance over the form and vicarious liability, providing, operating, and support do not necessary to perform the duties/commitments personally. Employers, for instance, will take up liabilities of employees, e.g. negligence, wrongful acts ... etc. (including public liabilities) during the working hours.

As applying to this case, BPPVE, i.e. CA State government, will take up the liabilities of its approved institutions. In other words, providing, operating and support in legal sense will come back to the State government ultimately.

 

The basic concept of common law is from equity and reasonable. However, for Florida, I donn't know!

 

(1) (b)Provided, operated, and supported by a state government or any of its political subdivisions or by the Federal Government;

For revising this term again, I wish to take a simple example.

If I establish a private institution in Florida with approval license from the educational department to grant degree programs but does not have any regionally accreditations, can I say the degree programs are provided, operated and supported by the Florida State government?

State approval means the programs are allowed to operate, provide and support by the State government.

 

I chose St. Leo's because it's a private institution. St. Leo's has numerous accreditations, which is why it meets (1) (a). However, even though accrediting authorities or the state may inspect it from time to time, they don't oversee it's day to day operations. Therefore, St. Leo's is NOT, I say again, NOT operated BY THE STATE. It is operated by a private corporation. I never said that St. Leo's met (1) (b). In fact, I chose them because they (being a private institution) do not meet (1) (b).

University of Florida (and all other Florida state schools) are operated by a board of trustees. Part of the board is appointed by the Governor and part of the board is appointed by the board of governors. The board of trustees is the representative of the state in the operation of the state schools. Therefore, University of Florida is OPERATED by the state.

(1) (b) is necessary because of an establishment of a new state school in Florida or any other state. In my earlier post, I made up a fictional institution called Georgia Southeastern Institute of Technology. In that post, I described where GSIT might graduate it's first class before regional accreditation was granted. In keeping with that theme, let's look at the history of University of North Florida. UNF was founded in 1969 as part of the state university system. The first students started attending class there in 1972. The first graduation was on June 10th 1973. UNF didn't receive accreditation until 1974. So, UNF would be an example of a school meeting (1) (b) until it became accredited, then it met the requirements of (1) (a).

I never said that St. Leo's met the requirements of (1) (b). If you took it that way, you misread it. As I said before, I chose St. Leo's because it is a well-known private institution and it is not operated by the state.

Nowhere in the paragraph for BPPVE does it even come close to saying operated. They establish educational standards and they respond to student complaints. But they don't actually operate a school. By your reasoning, since the company I work for is ISO 9001 registered, the ISO committee operates it. The ISO committee establishes a quality standard and registrars verify it's implementation at companies that wish to be ISO9001 registered. I have auditors stop by every 6 months to see me, but they don't operate the company.

BPPVE may evaluate an institution. BPPVE may approve an institution. But nowhere does it say they operate it.

BTW, in (1) (d) covers schools in Florida that don't meet (1) (a) or (1) (b) or (1) (e). The Commission for Independent Education is similar to California's BPPVE.

 

As I explained under the law concept before, operating does not necessary to perform personally! For example, one who kills another may not be the same person to operate the murder! He/She can employ a gunner (i.e. the one to operate) to kill the person. However, he commits this murder due to the guilty of intention and directly IN CHARGE OF this operation!

Similarly, if the institution is approved by the State government to operate and provide the degree programs (i.e. the role play of gunner in above case), the State government is in charge of its operations and performance (i.e. the one to employ the gunner in above case). Again, as I explained, to interpret the terms of statute should follow the legal point and view.

If you say the overseeing inspection SHOULD refer to the university's day to day operations by government personnels, I think the term 1(b) should ONLY include PUBLIC/GOVERNMENT OWNED UNIVERSITIES. However, EVEN the presidents, professors and lecturers of the government owned universities are ONLY employees under contractual terms. In other words, they are not the government personnels of educational department. Therefore, EVEN public universities cannot meet your daily overseeing inspection requirement. In this case, the professors, lecturers ... etc of this public university are delegated their authorities from the educational department to take daily operations of the university to comply with the law. Similary, a state approval private university is delegated its authority from the educational department to take daily operations of the university to comply with the law.

In fact, inspection from time to time or regularly includes to check any violations of day to day operation!

As I explained in earlier thread, if I operate a private unaccredited university in Florida with the approval license from its educational department, the degree programs, as an educational institution of the state, are provided, operated and supported by Florida State government IN LEGAL SENSE under Educational Article/Code of XXXXXXX.

 

Let me explain the law concepts of substance over the form and vicarious liability here in operation process. I've learned you're an engineer. Therefore, supposing I were your employer of the engineering firm to operate a project for a client, would you think I, as your employer, would not be liable for any damages due to your negligence to the project of the client? Could I excuse that the project was operated daily by you but NOT me since I did not oversee and operate the daily operations PERSONALLY but only monitor/inspect your performance from time to time? Thus, I did not take any operations of the project but ONLY you! Under vicarious liability concept, I, as your employer, am liable even though I do not operate the project daily BUT delegate the authority to my employees. Actually, the employer (the one delegating the authority to operate the project), rather than the employee (the one physically to operate the project), will be liable for the damage of the client!

Similarly, a state approval institution, just like the above case as an employee or assigned agent, represents the State government, just like the above case as an employer, to provide and operate the degree programs. Both parties are required to be liable for students and public. In other words, under specific educational act/article/code of the state, State government is delegated its authority to the state approval instituion to provide and operate the degree programs.

Therefore, a state approval institution is providing and operating degree programs that are supported by the State government as described in 1(b).

 

One more point I wish to explain is that, under (1) of above term, an institution should refer to either accredited as described in (a) or an institution provided, operated and supported by a state government .... in (b) that should either be public or private institution. So, it should refer to the degree programs of an institution (public or private) being provided, operated and supported by the state government.

 

kc, we're going in circles on this.

Let's just say that you have a very, very broad interpretation of the law and I have a more narrow interpretation of it. I disagree with you and leave it at that.

 

I had to just add this. Your comparison above is flawed. Because there are two different laws covering a crime and being an accessory to a crime. If person A has person B commit murder. Person B commits the murder and person A is an accessory. It's called being a principle in the first degree. There is an entirely separate law covering being an accessory.

You are taking "allowed to operate" and "operate" as being equal and they are not.

 

A private institution is not provided, operated, and supported by the state. If you're looking for a basis upon which to challenge this law, good luck to you, but you better find a new basis for your legal challenge.

 

Try to interpret the term of this statute in legal manner again! The term does not specify ONLY public institution in 1(b). If it specifies the institution must be a public nature, then, it will be another issue!

Also, as I explained before, if I operate a private institution with educational license from the educational department of Florida State, I cannot say the degree programs of the institution are provided, operated and supported by the State government IN LEGAL MANNER, can I?