SCUPS restores doctoral programs, but...

The main point is that I believe that there's both a quantitative and a qualitative difference between doctorates and lower level degrees. CCU can be a decent or even a fine school for the lower level degrees. A huge university like UCLA or UC Berkeley can be part of the greater academic research community for most different types of study. I've seen no evidence that a relatively small institution such as CCU can do the same. I personally doubt that it is reasonably possible.

Once DETC starts accreditting doctorates (assuming that they do) it will be very interesting to see how they manage it.

 

I don't pay attention to these matters to the same extent as others on this forum, but it is possible that the first DETC accredited school to be allowed "DETC accredited doctoral degrees," will be UNISA. They have a very large student body and so there is a large data base of doctoral achievement. I have heard some say they are among the least regarded schools in ZA but in the world of post-merger ZA higher education, and with a new chief administrator...who knows? This wouls also answer the frequently asked question, "Why did UNISA bother to get DETC accreditation?" It may be a part of a long-term strategy for both organizations. I'd think better of both organizations if this turned out to be true.
Jack

 

CCU claims to have about 8,000 students at any one time and I have no doubt that is in the ballpark.

What does Harvard have - 10K ?

 

What key words and in what order were they for the "Bill Dayson Google search test"?

I want to search a couple of other schools with the same combo and see what comes up.

 

I think that institutional research resources might be more relevant than enrollment numbers. See (here).

For an example of a school with a tiny enrollment that swings the scientific bat like Barry Bonds, check out the Scripps Research Institute. See (here). 164 graduate students. Plus a million square feet of lab space and a staff of 2,800, including 287 faculty members (how's that for student/faculty ratio?) and some 800 post-docs. Three Nobel laureates and 16 members of the National Academy of Sciences.

 

Bill,

been there, still a favorite place to visit. I never realized they were so involved.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

When I did the Google search on CCU I went to the advanced web search page, clicked on 100 per page and in the "with the EXACT PHRASE" entry I put in "California Coast University" (without the quotes).

 

My understanding of the financing of academic research (which is only gained second hand based on what friends of mine have told me) is that it is primarily driven by grants. Grants from both government and commercial interests. If an organization can get lots of grant money then their research will likely be cutting edge. If they can't get the grant money then they will have a hard time just playing catch up.

 

I did a literature search and found 39 papers by Dr. Vawter. What's interesting is that they are mostly quite recent -- except for two from the 80's (including one with the compelling title "Hole board food search task in rats: effects of hole depths and food deprivation").

So I wonder if he had a career change, and if CCU was part of that? Could be an interesting story...

 

I'm guessing that this is where the traditional universities win out. They have the core of full-time faculty members who have the ability to apply for grant money, knowing they'll be around next semester, next year when the the grant money is actually handed down. No adjunct is going to go through all that work when the outcome is so uncertain.
Jack

 

I just did the same search for the University of Norht Florida. They do offer a Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership.

Using your method, I could not find any evidence that UNF participated in the greater academic research community. In the first 100 links, I found several offers to purchase frames for your degree, a few resumes, tuition calculator, volleyball camp retreat, and baseball stats. But no evidence that UNF participated in the greater academic research community.

I just think this is a really poor method to use to measure a schools value.

I just did the same search on the University of Florida. The UF search displayed links the school of medicine, law, engineering, pharmacy, and business. Even a link to The Vietnamese Student Organization at the University of Florida. There were two links that were to research info. One was the Research Centers University Ratings and the other was "The Evelyn F. & William L. McKnight Brain Institute of the University of Florida (MBI-UF) is one of the world's largest research institutions devoted to the challenges resulting from brain and nervous system disorders. The MBI-UF's research and educational programs incorporate over 300 faculty from 57 academic departments and 11 colleges."

For a school as large as UF, only two links were found in the first 100 that offered any evidence that the school participated in the greater academic research community.

 

Bill Huffman: "I don't consider those finds indicative of CCU being a member of the greater academic research community. It is a list of people that have CCU degrees. IMHO, there's a huge difference. I've said many times that CCU is possibly the best of the unaccredited general education institutions that specialize in distance learning. The question that I was trying to answer with the BDGS (Bill Dayson Google Search) was whether or not CCU is involved in the greater academic research community. Bill Dayson has proven to me that some unaccredited institutions are part of the academic research community with his BDGS. My opinion is that for a doctorate to be fully valid it must be bestowed by an institution that is part of the greater academic community. Based on my one BDGS ( I admitted that I'm an amateur), I could find no evidence that CCU was part of the academic research community. IMHO, This does not detract from the CCU Bachelor's degree or the CCU Master's degree."



Cehi: Thank you for the feedback. Obviously, our purposes are different in what we seek, which also makes both of our conclusions very much different. Thank you.

 

This looks like one.

http://lnf.cnrs-mrs.fr/crnc/journals/primato/primengl.html

I found a number of links indicating that NFU has some unusual culinary arts program for troubled kids that seemed interesting.

http://www.time2act.org/archives/1193.aspx

I also found it interesting that the subjective "quality" of the links found for CCU versus UNF seemed to paint a more positive academic feel for the overall UNF links. e.g., I didn't notice any that were questioning the academic validity of UNF or a UNF degree.

I would suggest that perhaps a better way to approach my rather negative suspicions of CCU is looking through more than the first 100 links and finding some examples of at least strong academic activity, if not academic research activity.

 

I'm curious about the subject of these papers. Were they experimental psychology papers? Counseling psychology papers? Or papers on molecular biology laboratory technique?

Yeah, it is interesting, in several different ways.

I think that he clearly has changed careers. His masters in counseling psychology from USC probably has very little to do with his current position. I'd say that his CCU doctorate in clinical psychology is unrelated as well. His CSULB masters in experimental psychology probably had more to do with rats and holes than with gene-chips. The UC Santa Cruz psychobiology bachelors may be related, but probably not if it was earned some time ago. This microarray stuff is pretty recent.

So I doubt if any of his higher education is directly related to his current work. It does show that he's a very bright and inquisitive guy, though.

So I'm just guessing, but Dr. Vawter probably learned this stuff on the job. He may have gotten a technician job at UCI, was assigned to a new microarray project, thoroughly learned the material hands-on, and became very good at it. Eventually, he was running the lab.

Was CCU a part of that? I don't see how it could have been, directly, if it doesn't have anything going on in this research area. It may have allowed Dr. Vawter to assume a higher pay grade or job title, since he had an earned doctorate. But the guy at UC San Francisco who holds a similar job in charge of a microarray lab there suggests that a doctorate probably wasn't a requirement for the position.

 

Rich,

My opinion matches yours on this topic.

Tony

 

Harvard has just over 20,000 students, but Bill Dayson's comment about resources vs. enrollments is true. I would be willing to bet that Caltech, with 2,000 students, engages in more research than many institutions with much higher enrollment.

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino (16,000+ students)

 

In order to be classified as contributing to the "greater academic research community" (as opposed to internal research, such as would be done by a college or university's insitutional research department), a scholar would be presenting papers at professional conferences, publishing in academic journals, writing research-based books or working in research centers or research consortia.

Citing one person (such as Dr. Vawter) is helpful, but it does not establish that California Coast University graduates participate in the "greater academic research community"--only that one graduate of many thousands does. Cehi's list of CCU grads is also helpful, but problematic in that many of the links are dead and that the large majority of the grads are adjunct faculty (many of whose positions do not require doctorates). If these people had long lists of publications and presentations, then the argument would be stronger.

As far as speculating how Dr. Vawter's CCU degree has contributed to his scholarly productivity--if it is an important issue, why not ask him?

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

I don't think CCU as an administrative institution has a presence in the greater research community. I also don't believe that is CCU's role. I think it's clear that CCU facilities don't lend themselves to on-site empirical research such as that sponsored by traditional universities on the basis of government, private, and corporate grants; however, there are a significant number of CCU graduates who participate within traditional research and academic fields. e.g. I believe Cehi's list represents a small number of graduates who are engaged in the greater academic and research community. There have also been lists presented that demonstrate there are many hundreds of faculty at accredited universities holding CCU credentials.

It's important to recognize CCU doctoral students must do their own research, in facilities other than the school's, under the tutelage of the university and doctoral committee (all traditional doctorates), who confer the degree on the basis of appropriate supervision and state authority. ...whether you agree with it or not.

It's amazing to me how much attention and churn CCU receives. What is it about this school that keeps people humming when for instance, in this case, the thread was about SCUPS?

 

The Scripps Research Institute describes their funding this way:

Grants and contracts provide funding for a significant portion of TSRI's research activities. This revenue is derived primarily from the National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies. Grantors include, among others, the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and the Juvenile Diabetes Association. In addition, TSRI currently enjoys a large-scale industrial collaboration agreement with Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Technology transfer activities — royalties and gains from the sale of equity securities received in exchange for technology licenses and corporate funding agreements — fund raising activities, and investments provide resources for new programs, recruitment of new scientists and internally supported research.

Gifts from individuals and private foundation provide an important source of funding for TSRI. Private foundations that have provided support include the ALSAM Foundation, Lucille P. Markey Charitable Trust, G. Harold and Leila Mathers Charitable Foundation, W.M. Keck Foundation, Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, Harold L. Dorris Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation.

http://www.scripps.edu/intro/facts.html

In 2003, the Scripps Research Institute received $196,304,000 in sponsored research grants from the National Institutes of Health alone.

That's "big science", folks. Not too shabby for a school that only has 164 students. Of course, TSRI has other things on its mind besides granting doctorates.

 

While I'm thinking about grants, I'll point out that the CA-approved Institute of Buddhist Studies is one of the recipients of a prestigious Numata endowed chair in Buddhist Studies. The other 13 recipients aren't bad company.

http://www.mitutoyo.co.jp/eng/culture/bdk/world.htm

The deciding factor in this case was probably IBS' status as the national seminary of the BCA, as well as its associations with the Graduate Theological Union and Ryukoku University in Japan.