So, you think regional accreditors have high standards

I have taught legal studies at a few online schools, including Washington Online. I have also taught at Kaplan and I teach at a local community college. By background I am an attorney though I no longer practice for the most part, but teach. I will be the first to vouch that Washington Online is a highly ethical institution, and offers an excellent education for the paralegal student. I think WoLI considers itself a leader insofar as other online schools have come along and essentially adopted WOLI's format in terms of curriculum, course structure, tuition schedule, marketing, and the like.

 

The bottom line is:

(A) The institution’s claim to be accredited when it is still a candidate.
(B) The failure of Hank Cram of MSA to acknowledge this. Candidacy is not a period when an institution should be making questionable claims.
(C) The fact that the institution has been claiming to be accredited for 5 years when it was not.

A clear example of the difference this makes to students is this.

California legislation (AB 1761) made it unlawful for persons to identify themselves as paralegals unless they possess one of the following four requirements:

1. A certificate of completion from a paralegal program approved by the American Bar Association.

2. A certificate of completion from a paralegal program at, or a degree from, a postsecondary institution that requires the successful completion of a minimum of 24 semester, or equivalent, units in law related courses and that has been accredited by a national or regional accrediting organization or approved by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education.

3. A baccalaureate degree or an advanced degree in any subject, a minimum of one year of law related experience under the supervision of an attorney who has been an active member of the State Bar of California for at least the preceding three years or who has practiced in the federal courts of this state for at least the preceding three years, and a written declaration from this attorney stating that the person is qualified to perform paralegal tasks.

4. A high school diploma or general equivalency diploma, a minimum of three years of law related experience under the supervision of an attorney who has been an active member of the State Bar of California for at least the preceding three years or who has practiced in the federal courts of this state for at least the preceding three years, and a written declaration from this attorney stating that the person is qualified to perform paralegal tasks. This experience and training shall be completed no later than December 31, 2003.

Now, if a student has completed a program consisting of 24 credits from an accredited institution, the student would qualify under requirement #2. Otherwise, it is unlawful for the individual to identify themselves as a paralegal in California. If an attorney in California were to claim this individual is a paralegal, and represent to a client that particular work was done by this paralegal, the attorney may be subject to liability.

I sincerely hope that the federal government does not decide to take over the accreditation process. That would put the entire education system in this country in the hands of bureaucrats, which, in my opinion would be terrible. That said, accrediting agencies have been accused of being secretive and of not applying a uniform standard to all institutions. What Dr. Cram is doing is giving the federal government “ammunition” to “nationalize” the accreditation process.

 

Washington Online Learning Institute

I would certainly not hesitate to rely on the opinion of Hank Cram over an obviously hostile anonymous poster on this discussion board. WOLI knows it is the target of malicious attacks by jealous owners of inferior schools, this discussion being but one example of many. WOLI continues to succeed where other schools fail because it does not simply steal other schools' approaches, but creates its own. I am proud to be a member of the WOLI faculty. I am in a position to compare it to other schools. "Copycat" online schools continue to try to steal WOLI's business and educational model, but have had only limited success. WOLI, on the other hand, flourishes because it is a genuine creation, founded in honesty, and has a genuine record of which it can justifiably be proud. WOLI students I teach are employed all across the country. The U.S. Department of State has selected WOLI as the school where they train their diplomatic personnel. I am sure they conducted a thorough review of WOLI before sending nearly 100 students there last year. I would rely on them and MSA without hesitation.

 

Re: Washington Online Learning Institute

All of this may be true, but can you address these concerns?

 

I believe these matters have been satisfactorily dealt with in previous posts. Read through the entire thread and you will find these subjects discussed in full.

 

No, Steve, that is incorrect. WOLI is licensed and regulated by the New York State Department of Education. It has nothing to do with Regents.

 

You sound a lot like me. It's good to know I'm not the only one taking an unusual path through life. Tell us a bit about yourself: what part of the country you in? Why'd you get out of FT practice of law? Where'd you go to school?

I'm nosy--occupational hazard.

 

Re: Washington Online Learning Institute

I understand why you're proud to teach and why you're quick to defend your institution, but...

What about the matter at hand? Look, I have no opinions yeah or nea about WOLI or Mr. Cram at all--no dog in this fight whatsoever. But I think if I were in your shoes, the first thing I'd want to do is determine whether the charges are accurate. If you just circle the wagons here and fire back defensively, as a faculty representative of WOLI, you don't do much to make them look innocent.

Just because the original poster's anonymous, that doesn't mean he's untrustworthy. Just because lesser institutions have attacked WOLI before, that doesn't mean that's what's happening now. Just because WOLI offers a very high quality education and is tip-top in every other respect, that doesn't give them carte blanche to mislead regarding accreditation--if they have actually done so.

Irregardless of anything Mr. Cram says, I'd be very concerned if I discovered that WOLI has been falsely advertising accreditation for 5 years. And I wouldn't want to fall into the trap of making ad hominem attacks on detractors and questioners. You need those people to keep you honest, they make you stronger in the end.

 

Just because an anonymous poster makes derogatory comments about WoLI doesn't make it so. I take the poster's attacks for what they are worth: false, perhaps libelous claims. What more is there to say? Certainly, if WOLI has been making false claims for years, it would not have merited accreditation by Middle States, which is a very rigorous regional accrediting agency. I prefer to rely on recognized leaders in industry than to rely upon scandalous claims by anonymous bloggers. OK?

 

I just searched the CHEA and US DoE directories for accredited institutions for Washington Online Learning Institute and came up with "0". Go and see for yourself.

I may be an anonymous poster, but I will take the information from the Dept of Education and the Council on Higher Education Accreditation as more reliable than a poster with a vested interest in defending the school in question any day.

According to those sources, WOLI is unaccredited. "What more is there to say?"

 

Look, a crummy defense is worse than no defense. Surely you can't be serious when making an argument to the effect of:

Middle States is respectable, Middle States is rigorous
Middle States is considering WOLI for accreditation
Ergo, it follows that WOLI could not have been making false claims for the last 5 years.

Sorry if my breath is not swept away by the clarity of that logic. It assumes that Middle States is: a). perfectly thorough in their inspections to the point of infallibility (absurd notion on its face) and/or b). incapable of making shaky ethical judgments under any circumstances (no one fits into this category in the history of the world, but for one man, and they nailed Him to a tree).

Is it not also possible that Middle States noticed this irregularity, voiced their concerns privately to WOLI adminsistrators, but decided that given the totality of the circumstances, such as WOLI's fine reputation and rigorous coursework, that the problem was mitigated and didn't warrant denying accreditation? Is that not possible?

Look, either it's true or it's not. But you sure aren't rallying many to your side with your reaction and your use of the term "false" and "libelous", which may itself be bordering on defamation.

Counselor, your defense is lacking here--perhaps because the defendant is too close to your heart?

 

Straw men

Gentlemen, or ladies, whichever you may be. You have set up straw men, which you now mow down and proclaim victory. The matter of WOLI's accreditation, or lack thereof, is explained above in earlier posts. What more is there to say? Indeed.

 

Re: Straw men

Indeed. WOLI is not accredited by any body recognized by either the CHEA or DoE. It is a cadidate with the MSA, yet claims falsely to offer accredited programs. That about says it all.

 

Precisely. That is why the language “Licensed and Approved” by the New York State Department of Education is misleading as well. This institution is licensed by NY State just as any institution which operates legally within NY State. The term “approved” implies that their relationship with NY State goes beyond licensure when this is not the case.

It is true that the NY State Board of Regents is recognized by the US Department of Education as a Title IV accrediting agency. However, this institution is not accredited or “approved” by NY State. They are merely licensed.

I believe that using the language “approved” with regards to NY State by an institution that is merely licensed is a violation of New York State education law. I wonder what Dr. Cram would have to say about that?

 

Re: Straw men

No it's not, except inasmuch as their claims have been demonstrated to be shaky.

Are you familiar with the concept of "setting up a straw man". Who exactly has set up a straw man here? That would be establishing something that is not and defeating it for rhetorical advantage, while trying to give the impression that the something that is not is actually your foe.

But in this case, we have the very real question of whether they made false claims for five years running. You seem determined to absolutely ignore the question, just refuse to face it, save to claim it's all explained--when it's not. If you honestly think they're innocent, then tell us how and tell us where it's so clearly explained. I read the above posts, and in my opinion, you're being flat disingenuous.

And again, I don't care one way or the other, I never even heard of the school until this week, means nothing to me. But your defense is so weak as to be nonexistent.

 

Re: Straw men

Frankly, I don't see any straw men being set up. I only see some questionable advertising (though not too egregious) on a site being mildly criticized and someone with some undetermined level of connection to that site being extremely defensive and finding the need to counterattack anything that moves on this thread with illogical and emotional arguments.

Like I said, I have no stake in this, but Mr. Legal Education seems a bit defensive for someone with nothing to hide.

 

WOLI

I have taken the liberty of reposting Pug's message from another thread.

Washington Online Learning Institute
There is another active thread ripping WOLI at the moment. I thought I'd post the following for what it's worth:

1) WOLI is a candidate for RA, decision due in October 2006. From what I can tell, it's a go. They've alreday had their review.

2) My wife was interested in WOLI's paralegal certification (10 month course). We contacted NALA, National Association of Legal Assistants, and confirmed that WOLI's 10-month program qualifies you to sit for the CLA (Certified Legal Assistant) exam.

3) We then called Excelsior, where my wife is working toward her BA, and asked whether the courses taken at WOLI would transfer to Excelsior. This was a concern because WOLI works in clock hours, not semester hours or quarter hours, because the national paralegal certifications are tracked in this manner. Excelsior stated they would accept the credits if WOLI wrote a letter, on letterhead, a course by course recommendation that converts clock hours into semester hours.

4) In less than 24 hours we received said letter from WOLI, outlining how each of the courses in the paralegal program would convert into semester hours of credit. Their recommendations are consistent with a typical paralegal certification program at a community college.

5) We have found WOLI to be EXTREMELY helpful and responsive, especially for not yet being enrolled. I wish more colleges had WOLI's customer service skills.

6) The University of Phoenix, although itself flawed in the minds of some, myself included, has an articulation agreement with WOLI. I suspect most schools will accept WOLI's credits, particularly once full RA is earned.

I have read the section of the WOLI website pertaining to accreditation and find no deception, as some indicate. They certainly seem on the up-and-up to me based on my first hand experience with them, their RA candidacy, their credit transfer acceptance, and my confirmation with NALA.

Pug

 

Re: WOLI

As I said on the other thread, explain to me why WOLI advertises accredited programs when they hold no accreditation. If you do not explain this I'll assume it is because no explanation exists beyond careless and/or deceptive advertising.