Side-By-Side comparision of CCU’s MBA and TUI’s MS-ITM

Rich,

while your results are noteworthy the unfortunate truth is that not only do unaccredited degrees have utility but also diploma mill degrees, including in academia, the Georgia teachers for instance, or any number of other posts we read daily (albeit time-bombs). "When informed about accreditation, the acceptability of degrees from unaccredited schools dropped." No argument, how many folks remain uninformed? Certainly more than informed or degree mills would be out of business.

But to my point of applicability. California approved schools have applicability in California in that they are not illegal for use within its state. Utility of the degree is another matter. (My clarification of "applicable" in the usage from my original post.)

You state:
"Degrees from California-Approved schools don't seem to have any greater acceptance in business and education than they do elsewhere." and then comment: "There's no research to support the idea that businesses in California find these degrees more acceptable than do businesses in other states, either."

Without a research study how do you come to a conclusion on the acceptance or non-acceptance of a California state approved degree within the confines of California?

I wonder how the schools are thriving if their degrees have no applicability or utility?

"Unaccredited is unaccredited." I agree, but my comment was more to Randell's efforts and the fact that academically, learning did take place.

 

Fine, but I'm not talking about learning. I'm talking about degrees and their recognition and utility.

The bottom line: There is no evidence that degrees from California-Approved schools enjoy significantly greater utility in California than they do elsewhere. (Absent, of course, a few unaccredited schools approved to have their graduates sit for licensure in a few fields.) I would welcome evidence to the contrary.

Opinion: California-Approved degrees, like those from other unaccredited schools operating with some form of state authorization, enjoy great utility overseas. I would love to see the proportion of Kennedy-Western University graduates from Asia, for example. It would not surprise me in the least to find that it is a vast majority.

 

I don't believe that it is true. How can I come to that "conclusion"? Why would it mean greater utility? Would be my response? Do you think that a Kennedy-Western Degree would carry more weight in Wyoming? Would a LaSalle (LA not Penn.) degree carry more weight in LA?

I believe that unaccredited degrees generally carry the same weight which is close to zero unless the people making the assessment are uninformed. Are there some exceptions to this general rule? Of course there are, there are a very few valid unaccredited schools that have built a name for themselves. There are also apparently a few degree mill apologists that claim to be in HR and also claim that they like to hire graduates from unaccredited schools.

 

Bill,

I don't know if there is "greater" utility in California for a CA approved school degree, but I also don't know that there isn't and have no studies to prove either position. My common sense tells me that "if" there were a market for this degree that it would be within the location that it would be recognized and legal for presentation if the school were of value despite the unaccredited status. I can not state whether KW and LaSalle are more valuable in their home state but I can tell you that the regional schools here in the south carry more weight in the south than a degree from a school from your neck of the woods (oops, beach). I believe the reverse would be true also.

"There are also apparently a few degree mill apologists that claim to be in HR and also claim that they like to hire graduates from unaccredited schools."

I don't follow this comment as it pertains to my post.

And just so I am clear, I am not supporting mills. However there can be a world of difference between unaccredited and earned versus mill and bought.

Lastly, unfortunately, the people making the assessments are uninformed.

 

But I'm not. I've done actual, accepted, reviewed research on this topic. In addition, I've done a Ph.D. specializing in this field. That gives me a cache beyond the limitations of my research project. I get to speak with authority. (It is up to others to accept or reject that authority.) And I say there is no reason to believe California-Approved degrees enjoy greater acceptance in California.

 

IMHO there's a huge difference between these two examples. A resident college has people from the area that go to school there and frequently then settle in the area that they went to school. Also, many local people will go to school at a local school. This generally develops a strong local reputation for the schools in the area. Institutions specializing in distance learning are much different in this regard. They lack the local potential students as well as people that decide to settle in the area that went to the resident school. They don't have any local area reputation that can be gained. This is true whether they are accredited or not. There is nothing with a distance learning institution that would fuel this local area reputation that is built up for brick and mortar colleges.