Virginia University of Lynchburg Accreditation on Warning

6-10 pages cumulatively or for the final paper for the course? I don't think that DHA programs tend to be writing heavy. The two issues I see with VUL's program are that it doesn't appear to be as healthcare-oriented as competitor programs, and the practica courses are not practica. I've looked at dozens of profiles of OSU's DHCA graduates, and their resumes are pretty impressive. Most are either clinical professionals or healthcare administrators. VUL seems to attract everyone under the sun, but I could be wrong.

I believe the two most "prestigious" DHA programs are at MUSC and University of Mississippi Medical Center. I've seen a lot of their graduates in full-time faculty roles. I've also seen quite a few from Central Michigan University.

 

Yes, some of my finals were 6-10 pages only at VUL... I am not kidding. While some may argue it's up to the professor, how does that equate to doctoral-level work? I guess condensing your thoughts into 6-10 pages is harder than writing 20-25 pages?

 

Some DHA programs have capstones or dissertations. The VUL and OSU programs aren't applied research degrees. I guess their purpose is to train leaders. The EVMS Doctor of Health Science program is similar.

 

I think it's pretty apparent which degrees fall where when rating based on accreditation. Of course, that is the way I believe: a scale from gold to tin would rate accredited programs. As people say, the "gold standard" is regional accreditation. Where would you put everything else? While regionally accredited for-profit universities such as Capella, Walden, and the University of Phoenix are usually looked down upon, you can find them teaching at regionally accredited universities here and there. Now, not saying they are less inferior to a state university or big R1 or R2 university, but during the application process, a university looks at experience and which school you went to, often passing over applicants that went to for-profit schools, which is why I categorized them as silver. Looking at nationally accredited schools, they fall behind, and the old stigma of nationally accredited vs. regionally accredited schools comes into play. Still, to this day, many regionally accredited schools will not hire people with nationally accredited degrees, and some will not even accept their transfer credits, even with the Department of Education stating, "They are equivalent and can't be discriminated against because they are both educations received at accredited schools in the United States." Yeah, okay, that's BS as many nationally accredited degree holders struggle to find jobs in their field when compared to regionally accredited degree holders which is why I put them in bronze. Now, when a school has no accreditation and only state accreditation/recognition, pretty much most of us would call it a degree mill, which is why I rated it as tin, as that type of degree is pretty much useless. So, to sum this up, yes, this is something "I made up," but it makes logical sense when speaking on rating accreditation and the type of school status (public, private not for profit, for profit) using gold to tin as a scale for my example. You do not have to agree with me, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I speak from someone who has completed the VUL DHA program and a regionally accredited Doctor of Science program. I speak my mind without holding back. It is what it is, how someone perceives my post.

 

Here, you start by ranking schools based on their ability for someone to get a professorship(?), rather than acceptance by employers who don't seem to care where their applicants went, as demonstrated by the number of actual degree mills churning out degrees to professionals who do not struggle to get jobs. As we've learned from this board, most people don't have the focus or interest in academics that we do, even those in HR.

You start by saying RA schools will not hire people with NA credentials (which we can take at face value but doesn't say much) and then veer into a totally unsupported claim about NA degrees limiting employment prospects in their fields. I haven't seen anything demonstrating that.

Except we wouldn't have the concept of a "time bomb" where people get busted with false credentials if they hadn't been able to leverage those credentials into employment or career success in the first place.