RA For University of the People

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Bob Fiske, Apr 28, 2020.

  1. Maxwell_Smart

    Maxwell_Smart Active Member

    It's not a matter of "RA criteria" it's a matter of meeting the specific criteria of the specific accreditor being applied to. Each accreditor has its own unique standards, but they all have certain similar standards and this helps align with Department of Ed and CHEA recognition, how well they're enforced and maintained is another story and that varies which is why when an accreditor doesn't do a good job of that its recognition can be and has been stripped.
  2. LearningAddict

    LearningAddict Well-Known Member

    So what are the problems exactly? :) I never said those things aren't the case. Of course, looking only at schools that got RA would be a bias issue, but those schools were only brought up to counter the biased argument that all DEAC schools are trash, which by my mentioning those schools it at least shows that isn't true. To what degree it isn't true is a separate argument that I'm not making because I don't know the quality of all DEAC schools anymore than anyone else.

    However, to your point, the problem with implying that the DEAC is a benchmark of minimum standards or that a school which reaches RA is a school that exceeds them, is highly disputable based on a lack of evidence which you yourself pointed out:

    To know if DEAC has lower standards, we would have to review all of their schools or a random selection of their schools to see if they meet regional accreditors' criteria.

    As Max mentioned, we need a real study of standards between the DEAC and other accreditors to make the conclusion that the DEAC is the lowest standard. Because without that I could just as easily argue that DEAC schools which get RA have not exceeded DEAC's standards at all and have only met them and that has been good enough for them to get RA. I'm not even saying that's the case, but I am saying how do we know for certain without a real blow-by-blow analysis of standards?
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2021
  3. chris richardson

    chris richardson Active Member

    Nice job of selective cuts to try and make you point while leaving out context to what I was saying. Why people are unethical in trying to make points in a internet forum truly puzzles me.

    You have confirmation bias, we all do, but feel the need to project it as "fact" to defend NA as equal to RA, which is now more equal but still not equal in all cases. You have no data to support that a school that goes from DEAC to RA is still doing things the same, nor do I. But they did change for a reason and I suspect for some the sometimes perceived, sometimes valid "superiority" of RA is part of it. Your view or mine, doesn't really matter as it is simply our views.

    You cut away the context of globally. outside the US, a NA degree is hardly ever considered equivalent to a RA degree. It is what it is.

    The US Dept of ed can try and influence other countries to accept NA as they do RA, you let me know when that occurs OK? Because right now, internationally, immigration, other universities that are legit in their country etc want to see RA American degrees, or they aren't degrees.
  4. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    We can also read their accreditation standards. I just skimmed over DEAC's and HLC's accreditation criteria.
  5. tadj

    tadj Well-Known Member


    You've said: "outside the US, a NA degree is hardly ever considered equivalent to a RA degree. It is what it is."

    Could you provide any evidence for this claim? I am only aware of a few countries that have turned down NA degrees. That would be Germany, UK (*universities are free to accept them in that country) and Canada. I've also heard a few unconfirmed rumors about the RA-only degree acceptance policy of Australia, New Zealand and Greece. There are many places in Europe where NA degrees are fully accepted.
    Maxwell_Smart likes this.
  6. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Well, I haven't seen it on DegreeInfo. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened. It just doesn't make sense to me.

    I'm not an accreditation expert and I don't argue that one will get less education at a NA school than a RA school. I've heard the financial strength of the school can be a big hurdle for RA though. The main hesitation that I have with NA schools is that their degrees and any credit transfers are more likely to have problems with acceptability than RA. So, if one is searching for a degree to open doors then one should be careful that the doors they want open will be open on the NA program.

    Here's an okay comparison I found comparing NA vs. RA.
  7. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I thought there is no more RA or NA in the USA.
    There are recognized accreditors.
  8. Rachel83az

    Rachel83az Well-Known Member

    At least for now, there is no other good shorthand way to say "these accepted 7 accreditors" other than RA. NA schools are not automatically accepted now that the distinction has been Federally abolished.
  9. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    DoE doesn't make the distinction anymore, the accreditors still make the distinction amongst themselves. Regional accreditors still accredit within their own regions and national accreditors still accredit nationally.

    Also, you'd be hard pressed to find any RA school that has since amended their transfer acceptance or graduate admissions policy to accept DEAC as being equivalent to RA.
    Rachel83az and Dustin like this.
  10. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Plus, acceptance of RA versus NA degrees is not dictated by government. I worked for AT&T, NCR, and Teradata during my career as a software engineer. None of the places I worked would hire software engineers with NA degrees. I don't imagine that has changed. Heck, they rarely considered anyone graduating from the state university system. I recall HR sending me only one resume from San Diego State University. He had straight A's in school. They would recruit primarily from the University of California campuses.
    Rachel83az likes this.
  11. tadj

    tadj Well-Known Member

    Canadian evaluation services continue in their stubborn refusal to accept anything other than RA in Canada. It's interesting that they note the changes in the U.S. Department of Education policy though. But I have not seen any widespread reports of NA degree rejections outside of the few countries noted in my previous post.

    University of Toronto - Comparative Education Service:

    Link: https://learn.utoronto.ca/comparative-education-service/apply-now/new-applicants/country-document-requirements

    You need to select 'United States' from the menu to see the full note.

    "NOTE: As of July 24, 2020, CES only recognizes full accreditation during time of study granted by one of the following accrediters, due to the recent legislative changes related to the higher education accreditation reforms introduced by the U.S. Department of Education.

    Higher Learning Commission

    Middle States Commission on Higher Education

    New England Commission of Higher Education

    Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities

    Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Colleges

    WASC Senior College and University Commission

    Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges"
    Rachel83az and Dustin like this.
  12. sanantone

    sanantone Well-Known Member

    I'd like to know the history behind how Canada and any other country decided they weren't going to accept NA. One immigrant to Canada was told that the accreditation was considered vocational.
  13. Maxwell_Smart

    Maxwell_Smart Active Member

    Whoa, Chris, relax. It's not that serious man. You're pretty new here so you must not know fully how we communicate, but responding to points individually is routine, and far from "unethical", it's totally fair and honest if anything since it leaves no doubt as to what the responder is addressing. After all, any "selective cuts" are your own words. Let me know what words I quoted that you didn't say and we'll take it from there.

    No, Chris, that's not how it works. National accreditors have held official recognition verifying their legitimacy for a very, very long time. Therefore, the burden of proof is on those who claim their lack of legitimacy, not the other way around.

    Moreover, I never said NA was or wasn't "equal to RA". It's irrelevant because at the end of the day, NA accreditors are equally recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, always have been, that is a fact, and their statement a little while back regarding that fact addressed and set the record straight about the many years of misconceptions the general public have had about it. It was long overdue that they made the statement, because not speaking on it allowed for many years of wrong ideas and unfair discrimination against NA degree holders as a result. The NA-RA system's development had lots of geographic reasons behind it, it wasn't about creating a system of levels but it somehow over time came to be wrongly perceived that way.

    You have no idea what data I have or don't have, or what experience I have with some of those schools that gives me the confidence to make the statement I did. Every view is not equal.

    Not sure what it is with you and attributing things to "cutting" hahaha, but global context isn't ignored. However, the overwhelming majority of us live and work in the United States and aren't planning to live and work in any of the countless number of international locations, so it's not going to be brought up in every discussion or even most discussions for that matter.

    That's for other countries and the verrrrrrrrrrry small number of people trying to work in another country while holding those degrees to worry about. Pointing out edge cases like that isn't impactful because the NA-RA model is uniquely American and it wouldn't make sense to expect all other countries in the world to understand/accept it. In just the same way, we have models from other countries that the United States authorities don't accept. Believe it or not, there are countries whose authorities don't accept degrees (or have a negative 50/50 approach to them) from some respected RA schools and we learned that Germany is one of them.

    No matter where you get a degree from, someone, somewhere, somehow, will have a problem with it. Fewer problems if it's a respected RA institution? Sure, but it's still not a guarantee everywhere in the world.
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2021
    Dustin likes this.
  14. Dustin

    Dustin Well-Known Member

    Additionally, if you have the credentials or status to get the residency/work permit you need, the fact that an evaluator may not evaluate your NA credential is meaningless compared to what employers think of the degree. Someone on this board is working in Asia with an unaccredited doctorate (if I'm remembering correctly) and they had no issues using it for employment because their employers didn't care (or didn't ask) about the status and they never needed to submit it for evaluation.

    So while I might not be able to get an "equivalent to Canadian Masters" eval from WES Canada for my Quantic MBA that won't stop an employer from employing me on the basis of all of my skills and credentials which could include that degree.
    Maxwell_Smart likes this.
  15. Maxwell_Smart

    Maxwell_Smart Active Member

    Oh, ok you meant it in the context of DI.

    Yeah, I don't understand it either. The ABET for Grantham situation was another big one as that one was going on in a number of places on the internet. I never have a real dog in the fight except that I love seeing the overconfident, smug opponents go down in a nice crash and burn.

    Your take is fair and reasonable, I think we can all agree. The Drexel comparison though makes some concluding statements that are not true in all cases. For instance, "Credits are not transferable to a regionally-accredited college" is not true as a statement with no other qualifications. Many schools accept NA credits, many don't as well. But enough accept them now that it's not nearly the problem it was in the 90's and early 2000s where it seemed like an exercise in futility. It's not the "NA to RA = no go!" equation they have there, they even went as far as making a graphic for it which is kind of funny to me.

    Then there is "Predominantly for-profit institutions (earn revenue via enrollment or selling educational products). They may also have shareholders they must answer to." The "predominately for-profit" part is true, but "selling educational products"? I don't know what they're referring to but I don't know of any NA schools that are selling anything different from any other type of school. That one is weird, but they'd have explain what they're referring to.

    At this point after all of these years, most people here know and have accepted the limitations of degrees from NA programs, we know that many barriers and limitations have fallen over the years, but some still exist. I imagine many will persist for as long as small/tiny schools start with little resources and have to build over time. RA schools have a big advantage of longer time in operation, a lot more money to have a greater reach, and a greater influence as a result. Some NA schools are trying to get there, some are leveling to mid-range RAs, but there is clearly a lot more time needed even for the schools that have taken great steps forward in size and scope.
  16. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Yes, I meant it in the context of DI. If a statement such as "the DEAC and its schools were irredeemable trash" was stated on the Internet, I would just assume that it was a troll rather than a sincere belief.
  17. scaredrain

    scaredrain Member

    Per the WASC website, University of the People was granted candidate status:

    Per WASC: "Candidacy is limited to four years and is granted only when an institution can demonstrate that it is likely to become accredited during the four-year period. This means that UoPeople can receive RA as soon as 2022 or as late as 2025." There is also a visit from WASC that is scheduled to take place next year.
  18. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Huh! One of my earliest real jobs was at NCR in the '90s, doing Tier II support on their POS ONE account with USPS.
  19. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    In 1975 NCR hired me out of school to work on a new family of business computers. It was a joint project with CDC. The idea was to develop one OS that would span the whole family. With NCR HW engineers focusing on the small side and CDC HW engineers working on the big computers. They canceled the project after a few years.

    Yes, the POS devices were always the biggest part of NCR but I never worked on any of that stuff. Well except having to connect to them. Back in the 80's I was going to Price Club. (The original store that eventually grew into Costco.) When I got to the parking lot there was an employee there turning everyone around. I got a sickening feeling because I knew they used NCR POS and the computer system I worked on. So, I asked the guy what was wrong. He said that their computer system was down. The rest of the weekend I was worried. Lucky for me it turned out to be hardware problems. :)

    P.S. POS doesn't mean piece of shit in this context. It means Point of Sale device.
    See now you got me started. AT&T bought out NCR and had them run their computer division. AT&T had just won the bid at the USPS to upgrade all the post office computer systems. It was a huge project that made national news. Well the AT&T project leaders were bragging to their new NCR bosses about their victory in a presentation. NCR management asked them what their profit margin was on the project. NCR had bid that project as well when they were separate companies. The AT&T folks were stunned by the question. They had no clue what the answer was. AT&T hadn't set them up as a profit and loss center. So there was no reason to think about such things. After researching the question, it turned out they were losing a huge amount of money on the USPS project. The original AT*T company was unbelievably dysfunctional. I got more stories but I'll resist.
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2021
    SteveFoerster and Maniac Craniac like this.
  20. TeacherBelgium

    TeacherBelgium Well-Known Member

    Great news! My employer just authorized to pay for a degree with University of the People. I start in fall. Health sciences if anyone was wondering.
    I will likely have to mention on a résumé that it was DEAC during my period there but became RA after graduation. Not sure how that would work. DEAC was good enough for my employer.
    newsongs, Rachel83az and Dustin like this.

Share This Page