Salt Lake Bible College??

Clarification of accreditation statements made concerning Salt Lake Bible College.

Goto our Accreditation page at Accreditation and you will find our information. We take care to not claim more than what we are entitled to claim.

My Doctorate degrees are not from Salt Lake Bible College, they are from the parent organization, Salt Lake Baptist College, and my Bachelor degree is from Texas Baptist Bible College.

I earned my degrees and then went on to become the Administrative Vice President of Salt Lake Baptist College. I then was given the duty of starting Salt Lake Bible College online. We started in 2008 online and now, as of 2013, have over 7,000 students in 76 countries. Our student's degrees are recognized in those countries as well as in the USA. Some of our graduates work for various state governmental agencies in the USA and others have used our degrees to gain visas to enter and serve in various countries, including Brazil and China, as just two that come to mind.

The link that you mentioned to CHEA's website went to a page that was recently changed by CHEA. When we became aware of the change, we changed the link on our website accordingly.

We only state that CHEA recognizes the UK accrediting body, ASIC, and that is not a false statement. The info from our website is listed below:
-------------------------
CHEA listing:
ASIC (Accreditation Service for International Schools, Colleges and Universities) is listed with CHEA as a member of
the CIQG (CHEA International Quality Group) at http://www.cheainternational.org/pdf/CIQG Membership List.pdf

Alternative access on CHEA website:
Goto Council for Higher Education Accreditation Home Page
Click on "CHEA International Quality Group"
On the Quality Group page click on "CHEA International Quality Group Membership List"
On the Membership List page scroll down to the fourth line and you will find "Accreditation Service for International Schools, Colleges and Universities" (ASIC).
----------------------

There are other listings on our Accreditation page that you may do well to access so you have accurate information.

We strive to supply a quality Bible Education to anyone who wants one. And we do so absolutely free. We are not in the class of the colleges that ravage the pocketbooks of students and never has a student been refused because of lack of funds. God has freely given and our bedrock principle is that we freely give an education to everyone who asks. God has given this ministry to us and, by His power, we are trying to fulfill that ministry, and we do so strictly through freewill donations that are used to keep the college online.

Thousands around the world have studied, and are studying with, us and their appreciation has been expressed to us many many times. The lack of financial ability has never prevented even one of those students from studying with us. And they have spread the availability of learning the Word of God without charge far and wide. The majority of our students now come through word of mouth. We currently enroll from 2 - 9 new students, 7 days a week. And none are turned away. We will let God judge if we are approved by Him or not. And we will also let Him judge whether we are truthful in our presentation of ourselves and our accreditation that you have called into question.

I don't know if you will understand where I am coming from but, your approval is not what I am concerned about. However, I did feel compelled to answer your charge against us that we present ourselves in a way that is, as you put it, "absolutely false."

The University of America is affiliated with us, yes, but they do charge tuition and so forth, whereas, we do not.

I hope this clears up any misunderstanding that you may have concerning our accreditation and our presentation of ourselves to the world in that matter.

I have a class to teach in 7 minutes so I have not had time to proofread this post. Please excuse any misspellings or any other such errors- students await.

You may contact me at any time if you need further clarification in any of the matters addressed in this post.

Dr. Van

 

(Emphasis mine - Johann)

OK - I lack moral fortitude or any real desire to do good. Guilty. :sad: But I do not "spew crap" or make stuff up. Here's what Dr. George Gollin, the "real person" you admire so much had to say about Dr. Tulp:

"USAT/MCL and Lady Malina are both run by Orien Tulp, a retired professor of nutrition who holds a legitimate PhD in that field. However, Tulp also claims an MD degree, apparently issued by the "International University of Fundamental Studies" diploma mill. INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF FUNDAMENTAL STUDIES, FULL ACCREDITED AND REGISTERED POST GRADUATION DEGREE/HONOUR HOLDERS IN 2007 (2007), http://www.mufo.ru/downloads/Bulletin-No3.pdf." (Emphasis mine - Johann.)

The whole article is here:

Complexities in legislative Suppression of diploma mills. - Free Online Library

As I said, I don't get along very well with Dr. Gollin - but I do acknowledge and admire his exceptional knowledge of genuine schools, diploma mills issuing spoofy degrees, and the differences between the two.

You can forget about what I say - but Dr. Gollin is a "real" person -- and an authority with at least one book on the subject of diploma mills to his credit.

Johann

 

Dr. Gollin is also a physics professor and I hear he's running for Congress - but that's beside the point. :smile:
And oh, yes - I believe it's no secret that he posted here under a pseudonym for years. "Galanga", IIRC. But he was/is a "real" person, nonetheless. :smile:

Johann

 

So the doctorate is not self-conferred as some of us thought. It's from the "Mother-School," also with no US-recognized accreditation (and that's OK - none required - it's exempt.)

Well, it isn't now -- but I'd say as it appeared previously, it was not a complete statement. Originally, the text was taken (by myself and others) to signify that ASIC accreditation was recognized by CHEA - which it wasn't -- and still isn't. As long as we're clear on what exact recognition CHEA accords ASIC (member of a CHEA committee -and a foreign accreditor, not RA or NA) then we're OK.

That - in itself - is commendable. But it's not Doctoral level study. No matter if you call it so, no-one in recognized academia, secular or religious, would agree that the program, as set out, qualifies as Doctoral level study. So why do you call it that? :question: :question:

Johann

 

I hasten to add (beyond the 10-minute limit) that I feel your programs, as described herein, would be better suited to "certificates" or "diplomas" than degree-status.

Johann

 

The specifics are much clearer now. The doctorate wasn't conferred by Salt Lake Bible College, but by its parent organization, Salt Lake Baptist College. Subsequently, the utility, credibility, legitimacy and prestige of the doctorate has now increased exponentially--but would increase even more so if it was a certificate rather than a degree.

 

It seems clear to me that Utah law allows a religious organization to apply for exempt status and is able to offer degrees that follow a prescribed curriculum.

Utah Code


"13-34-201. Fraudulent educational credentials.

(1) A person may not use, give, or receive, or attempt or conspire to do so, in connection with a business, trade, profession, or occupation, a degree or other document which has been purchased, obtained, fraudulently or illegally issued, counterfeited, materially altered, or found, or which serves to evidence the undertaking or completion of scholastic achievement if the education has not been undertaken and attained.

(2) A violation of this section is a class A misdemeanor."

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney and one needs to consult one should legal questions arise.

 

I appreciate the effort you make backing up your statements! That's important from a "fake person"! hehe. I couldn't find the mentioned school listed with the International Medical Directory (IMED). However, I did see the "affiliated" Russian medical school of St. Petersburg listed! Even if the degree is honorary, it seems unwise to add it to the very reputable PhD in pharmacology and clinical nutrition from the University of Vermont which could stand alone impressively as a professor and administrator of a medical school.

 

As I see it, it is VERY unwise to add an IUFS degree of any kind - to anyone's records... It is a well-known degree mill. It is headed by a self-styled "Mahatma" (!) named Jayasekera, who has at least six unverifiable doctorates, including one in "Satellite TV." He started his career, without any higher qualifications, teaching courses in "rocket science" (sic) in his native South Asian village. My, how far he has raised his exalted self!!

IUFS is a "private" university - it can legally confer degrees but its diplomas have no standing with the State. On one occasion, its licence was revoked for a period of six months - I forget why. I noticed there were a couple of "dignitaries" from other known degree mills accepting IUFS degrees at the event where Dr. Tulp received his MD. I do not know of any concrete affiliation whatsoever between IUFS and a State medical school. Knowing IUFS, they would probably claim one anyway.

Its web page is here: Accreditation of the IUFS and I am pleased to report it lists at least half a dozen bogus accreditations, including California University Foreign Credential Evaluators, the Oxford Network (Nothing to do with the "real" Oxford), the "International Parliament for Safety and Peace" and a bunch more. Most of the "accreditors" have been much cussed-and-discussed in this and other fora. I am again indebted to "real" experts for what I know about these phoney accreditors and can supply references on request. As a school, IUFS is a sick joke.

I'm a firm believer that if you lie down with dogs you will get fleas - and those who associate themselves with unrecognized, bogus institutions and allow unrecognized accreditation into schools they run, will have some very itchy mornings. And yes, Dr. Tulp's Ph.D. is extremely reputable and could stand alone impressively for any professional purpose. But he has, for some reason chosen to do otherwise. Beats me. :question: Then again, Mr. Ross established a highly successful Medical School (which he later sold for $310 million) without any similar academic standing. Despite his fine academic achievements, Dr. Tulp's post-Drexel track record includes association with medical schools which did not succeed.

That ends the serious portion of my post. Time for some entertainment.

Have you tried using Gogol Translate ? :jester:

Sorry if I pissed you off, earlier. Mea Tulpa. :jester:

Johann

(I stole that last remark from the late "Uncle Janko" - who posted here for a long time and also on DD. Sadly, he died in an auto accident about three years ago. I miss his brilliant wordplay - which he did in at least a dozen languages.)

 

A note on "real" and "fake" people.

Yes, it takes guts to declare yourself, particularly if what you say might make you some enemies. I have it on very good authority that some well-known "real people" in the "Degree Mill War" have taken some nasty hits. They have received unpleasant things in the mail, harassing calls at home and work, publication of their personal and financial info -- there is no end to which some nasty people will go. I know they go after people's wives and kids ... and that's pretty sick. :sad:

Members here at DI have occasionally been "outed" from behind their pseudonyms by the nefarious digging of these characters, with very unpleasant consequences, e.g. having their credit-card numbers published online. I don't need that aggravation. That's why I prefer to remain anonymous. They can (and occasionally do) say anything they want about "Johann" --and it doesn't hurt me, my kids or my grandkids a bit...

Johann

 

"Real" people vs. "fake" people...wasn't there a scene in "Aliens" where the android says, "I prefer the term 'artificial person' myself."?

Let's see...corporations, estates, trusts, limited partnerships, religious organizations, even general pertnerships for certain purposes are all "people". Romney was actually right about that in a very technical, legal sense. I don't think he meant it that way, though.

In fact, corporations were "people" before African-Americans were and LONG before women were fully people.

SIgh.

 

So is this college, at the end of the day for religious or private purposes, a decent one to go to or not? ))

 

My assessment for what it is worth.

It appears this school is a branch of a religious organization legally operating in the State of Utah as an "exempt" post secondary school. It awards religious degrees through "undertaking and completion of scholastic achievement" reference Utah code 13-34-201.

It is accredited by a foreign accrediting agency called ASIC that apparently is recognized by the US CHEA. see link in previous post. Oh yeah, the price is right! tuition free but cheesy website. Sounds like a good find to me if one is interested in gaining more knowledge of religion and the Bible! Of course, many will disagree on this forum because, I have no idea! Like I said previously, not my area of interest although intriguing! I would probably never get a Pastor to sign me off to attend anyway!

 

Yes it is - just as Delta said. More on that, later. It may be a very good school indeed, for personal purposes - self-education or faith-building. Again, as Delta said, the price is certainly right. Just as long as you don't expect a degree from this school to get you anywhere in academia or be of use in any secular job-hunting you might need to do.

One has to remember, ASIC accreditation does not confer degree-granting powers. ASIC says so itself - and I appreciate their being up-front. CHEA recognizes ASIC as a foreign accreditor (and a committee member). That means that if you choose to earn a degree from Salt Lake Bible College, it is not "accredited" in the sense US schools normally use the word. It is neither Regionally nor Nationally Accredited -and those are the only two types of accreditation that colleges and universities obtain in the US. SLBC's ASIC accreditation is non-US - and, as ASIC admits, it does not confer degree-granting powers -anywhere.

As was said before - that doesn't mean that SLBC degrees are in any way fraudulent or illegal. The institution is not required to have accreditation (under religious exemption.) SLBC can lawfully confer degrees without any accreditation. If you accept the limitations - and undertake studies for personal education or faith-building - then you should not encounter problems.

There is nothing unlawful either, about SLBC calling these programs degrees -- but I'd rather see them called certificates, diplomas, etc. From what I've read, there doesn't seem to be anywhere near the rigor or quantity of content normally associated with degree studies - particularly in the case of the graduate degrees of SLBC.

Johann

 

Darn that 10-minute limit! What I meant to say, is that Regional and National Accreditation are the two types of Institutional accreditation for degree-granting US schools. Programmatic, industry and professional accreditations exist, of course - but I don't think they're relevant to this discussion.

Johann

 

I wonder if a NACES member evaluator would evaluate the degree based on the institution being "foreign accredited"? That would certainly answer a few questions! My guess is the degree would be labeled "state approved" and unaccredited. I would be pleasantly surprised if it is equal to national accreditation. If someone goes through the program, please tell us about it. I think it is safe to say it is NOT a "diploma mill"!

NACES How to Find a Member

 

I thought about the same thing. My guess is - they might not, as the school itself is not foreign - it has a US address. And if they did - I'm sure you're right about the result. They'd review the course content etc. and I'm positive that would result in an equivalency to an unaccredited degree. If a recognized evaluator (NACES-member or AACRAO) did evaluate the program - it would doubtless be "equivalent" to what it actually is - unaccredited, religious-exemption. One of the reasons SLBC would not qualify to receive mainstream accreditation, if it so applied is - it (obviously) has some people with unaccredited degrees in teaching roles. The technical term accreditors use for this, I believe, is is a no-no. :smile:

Of course, one could always pay a NACES-unrecognized evaluator, e.g. CUFCE, to certify any piece of paper from any school as equivalent to an RA Ph.D. :sad:

"It is what it is" has never been so true. Nothing wrong with taking these courses if you understand the limitations of an unaccredited, religious-exemption degree. I'd advise against experimenting with evaluators. You already know what the degree is -and what it isn't. It's like paying a jeweller $200 to appraise a rhinestone, when you know there's not a hope in hell it would be mistaken for a diamond! :jester:

It's a perfectly honest rhinestone. If that's what you're looking for, it'll likely do nicely. Let's leave it at that!

Johann

 

Steve is right -- as he always is. :smile: But the imprimatur of a recognized US Regional or National accreditor is needed to validate the academic legitimacy of a US school - if it is to be US-recognized as "accredited."

Foreign accreditors like ASIC may certainly validate academic legitimacy if they are requested to, but such validation does not grant US accreditation - RA or NA or anything else. AFAIK only validation by recognized National and Regional Agencies (and the New York Board of Regents, of course) will be considered as US institutional "accreditation" or a domestic equivalent.

I have a problem when I see schools display ASIC or other foreign accreditation in such a way, that it is made to appear equivalent or equal to, or carry the same significance as the mainstream accreditation in the country where the school is located. I have seen schools do this with ASIC and other foreign accreditations in the US and other countries.

When the significance of non-standard accreditation is exaggerated, as sometime happens, I mostly consider it the school's (minor) fault for being a little too "targeted up and markety-markety." Of course if the "accreditor" is something screamingly bad, like ACI - then it's the fault of everybody concerned. Thankfully, that's not the case here.

Johann