What ARE non-accredited DL universities, really?

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by BillDayson, Mar 9, 2004.

Loading...
  1. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    The thread about Century and DETC raised a question in my mind.

    I'm thinking here of the whole class of non-accredited DL universities that seem to be something more than scams. The 'legitimate non-accredited' as they are sometimes called. CCU, SCUPS, the late Greenwich.

    We've all seen their "great and wonderful Oz" websites, resembling those of accredited B&M universities. But who and what stands behind the curtain, pulling all of the levers?

    Who owns these things and what kind of corporate structure do they typically have? I get the impression that most of them are sole proprietorships, the personal property of one man. That's very unusual in conventional universities.

    What kind of paid staff do these things typically employ? How many people are there and what do they spend their days doing? One or two clerical assistants answering mail and maintaining the website? A whole office building full of employees?

    We all know that conventional universities have hordes of administrators, countless committees and byzantine procedures. The accreditors look closely at a university's internal process. How much of that process is actually replicated by the non-accredited schools, how mch exists only on paper and how much of it is simply dropped?

    Non-accredited DL univerities have an unsettling propensity to move from state to state and from island to island. So when a university suddenly changes addresses, what should we assume has physically and tangibly moved? What had to be boxed up and shipped? How many people had to sell their homes and pull their kids out of school?

    I think that getting a better picture of what lies behind the screen at this general class of school will help us get a handle on what these things precisely are, on how they differ structurally from conventional universities and on what kind of changes they would typically have to make in order to have a chance of becoming accredited. I'm sure that in some cases the changes would be far more profound than just dropping a few doctoral programs.

    I'd guess that American Military University's trouble with SACS might have been related to its resembling this class of school a little too closely. The NCA seems to have fewer concerns, witness NCU. But I'd wager that the NCA was careful to verify that all of the expected university functions are in fact being performed (perhaps not very well if the critics are to be believed) and that university governance doesn't reduce to the whims of one man. My feeling is that DETC is a little more willing to recognize the "great and wonderful Oz" universities, requiring that somewhat less tangible institutional mass exist behind the curtain. The BPPVE is no doubt less fastidious still.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 9, 2004
  2. cehi

    cehi New Member

    Bill,

    I am in no way an expert on DL. In summary, is it correct to say that your questions focuses on........(1) What is/are the difference(s) between convectional and unconvectional universities? (2) what does an unconvectional university has to change in its processes in order to be a convectional university vis-a-vis accreditation?

    I am just trying to understand your questions better. Thank you.
     
  3. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I have visited both AMU (when still in Virginia) and CCHS. Both seemed similar. There were department heads, administrative folks, admissions, etc. Both used adjunct faculty extensively. Because neither operated classrooms, both were small. (Both occupied two, one-floor buildings. I'd say about 20-30 rooms for each school.)

    AMU moved almost everything (except some marketing functions) to West Virginia when it decided to pursue NCU accreditation. I asked about SACS. They felt that SACS was never going to accredit them because of their non-residential format--and because of their decidedly nontraditional faculty (almost no full-timers).

    Neither CCHS nor AMU seemed like a one-person shop. California Pacific University, on the other hand, did. When I visited CCU in the 1980's there was a feeling of "completeness," very much like AMU and CCHS. One wonders if the same might be said of Kennedy-Western?
     
  4. oxpecker

    oxpecker New Member

    I have known the inner workings of only one, and it was a one-man show -- with some prominent educators coopted as advisors. Unfortunately it never really got off the ground.

    Establishing a legitimate degree program from scratch is really incredibly difficult. I am in awe of those such as James Etter and Glenn Jones who have managed to pull it off.
     
  5. Rob Coates

    Rob Coates New Member

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 9, 2004
  6. Dave Wagner

    Dave Wagner Active Member

    Agreed. I did a DBA at California Pacific University between the years of 1996-2003, finishing the doctoral project while working toward candidacy in the Touro Ph.D. BA program. I visited the offices twice over the years. Small and limited utility for teaching are about the only negative things I can think of in reference to the school experience. Self-paced, responsive, quality-oriented, challenging, inexpensive, good for skill attainment, and thoughtful are a just of few of the positive things that come to mind though.

    My two cents,

    Dave
     
  7. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    Interesting information, guys. Thanks for the posts.

    Now, if we could only find:
    Adam Smith University's famed 29000 volume library
    St Regis University's, uh, head shop
    Barton Stone Seminary's cryogenic resting place
    and
    WAUC's designated driver. (Take that cornu slowly, mate.)

    Has Galanga still got his camera?
     

Share This Page