What the Texas DOE thinks of CCU

I sent my letter today. What is troubling to me is the fact that CCU is the only DETC accredited school in the list, which in my opinion suggests a bias against the school. I also requested an explanation on the reason(s) why DETC is not recognized by the State.

Pepe

 

Hi Pepe,

It's great to hear that you sent a letter to the State of Texas, although it will probably fall upon deaf and ingnorant ears with Mr. Linkletter leading the way. Let us know what you find out.

The only way to change the State of Texas' standpoint is to bring this defamation and disrcimination into a federal court of law. But, we should all continue to send letters to Texas in show of our support to the DETC. The more letters sent, the louder the voice!

 

Jamie, please check your PMs.

Thanks,

Abner

 

I have no idea why a state would take it upon itself to enact a policy contrary to federal law. Unfortunately, the fact that this warped policy still stands shows that there are not enough people out there that care.

 

A state that would act in a manner contrary to federal law obviously believes itself to be a sovereign state, entitled to nullify federal law within its own borders.

 

Just because the Federal government recoginizes something doesn't necessarily mean that a State has to recoginize it. Right?

 

If Texas doesn't like federal law, they can always secede, can't they?

 

Do you think a state can prevent drivers with valid out-of-state driver's licenses form driving through?

 

Yes, they can and do.

For example, it is well known that states have different minimum legal ages for driver's licenses. It might be possible to get a valid driver's license at age 16 in State A, while neighboring State B requires drivers to be age 17. In this case, State B can legally stop a 16-year-old from State A from driving there, even if the 16-year-old possesses a valid State A driver's license.

States also have different standards for vision. A person with a particular vision impairment might be able to qualify for a driver's license in State C, by relying on certain vision aids or meeting certain vision standards that are not accepted in State D. In this case, the impaired person could not legally drive in State D, even with a legal license from State C.

The same is also true for professional licenses, hunting licenses, fishing licenses, and even marriage licenses. There is no guarantee that licenses granted by one state will automatically recognized by others. For example, many states today explicitly refuse to recognize same-sex marriage licenses that are legally granted by other states.

And the same is true for college degrees. In practice, college degrees usually "travel" across state lines, because states generally respect the decisions of accreditation agencies, which approve degrees on regional or national basis. However, if a state chooses not to respect the decision of a particular accreditation agency, then degrees accredited by that agency won't travel.

I personally think that the State of Texas should recognize DETC. But I would also bet that Texas does have the legal right to reject DETC-accredited degrees if they see fit to do so. DETC may be Federally recognized, but in general, states have the right to develop and enforce laws that are more stringent and rigorous than the Federal standards. For example, it is well known that the State of California's standards for automobile emissions are tighter than those enforced at the Federal level. Why can't Texas have tighter standards for accreditation agencies?

 

For example, the Massachusetts Driver's Handbook puts it like this:

States do have the legal right to deny recognition to licenses, degrees, or other credentials issued by other states, if those credentials do not meet in-state standards.

 

Not recognizing the degrees issued by DETC schools as valid does not violate any federal law, does it? The Department of Ed recognition is only for federal purposes, is it not? What is going on in this thread?

I think that Texas should change its stance on DETC schools, but I also think that this thread had departed from reality. If Texas does not want degrees from a few dozen small colleges used for employment within the state, then that's not such a big deal. It's really not.

Of all of the myriad reasons that I will not go back to Texas, this does not even make the list.

 

I’m not a constitutional expert, but I would think that Texas’ policy would violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause (as well as possibly the Commerce Clause) of the Constitution. Of course different states can have different laws regarding firearms possession, the legal driving or drinking age etc. Likewise, because accountants and attorneys need to address specific state statues, states have a right to reject other states’ law and accounting licenses. I think that, here, by Texas saying that one who possesses a college degree that is recognized by other states and the federal government, may not acknowledge that degree, is similar to not recognizing marriages sanctioned in other states.

 

I am not a lawyer, but I've argued with a few...in my opinion Texas does have the right not to recognize a degree or accrediting agency, they do NOT have the right to make it against the law (in criminal code) to use a degree from a fully legal and recognized agency.

 

If they do not have the right to make it against the law (which is what they are attempting to do) then all they can do is:
(a) Not recognize a DETC degree towards licensure in TX for a licensed profession. We know they can do that. There are states that do not recognize DETC degrees to sit for the CPA exam.
(b) Not recognize DETC degrees for job promotions within the state system. They can obviously do that as they are no worse than a private employer and can hire whomever they choose.
They cannot, as you point out, say that it is unlawful for an individual to claim they have a degree when the individual possess a degree from a DETC institution.
They are being ignorant, arbitrary and unfair. There are many fine DETC schools that are on the level of RA schools. TX has no right to whitewash legitimate schools that are accredited by a legitimate accrediting agency. No state has the educational expertise to contradict the USDOE.

 

Which law?

I'm not hearing from anyone exactly what federal statute Texas is violating.

There is nothing compulsory about recognizing accrediting agencies. And employers (public and private) are pretty free to recognize whatever schools, degrees, and accrediting agencies they choose.

The "Fed-trumps-State" thing is fine, for situations where the state is trying to do something different than the Fed. But the Fed rarely has anything to do with higher education, outside financial aid programs. Education is normally left to the states.

IMHO, just because the US Department of Education lists DETC as an accreditor does not compel Texas officials and employers to accept degrees from such schools.

(To the loonies who knee-jerk every defense of DETC: I'm not advocating the stance Texas has taken. I really don't care personally what they do.)

 

What impact does this law have on employees of the federal government and military members in Texas? Is it also against the law for these people to claim their degree, even though their employer (higher than the state) does recognize the degree?

There are very many military and federal employees using a DETC (and other NA) degree.

Will the fed govt. and military now need to use care not to transfer their employees with these credentials to Texas or are these employees no longer eligible for their position once they get to Texas because of their unacceptable degree?

 

Coach,

My point, exactly. While, as pointed out, there is no current federal statute that this Texas policy violates, there may be ample grounds to challenge this policy as unconstitutional in federal courts.
Furthermore, whether Rich Douglas personally cares about this issue is irrelevant. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of graduates from DETC institutions over the past decades who are being unrightfully discriminated against by the state of Texas.

 

I received a response to my letter to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Glenda Barron, Assistant Commissioner wrote:

"CCU's programs leading to bachelor's and master's degrees have been accredited by DETC since 2005. Our web site is being changed to reflect that fact. Degrees awarded by CCU prior to 2005 are still subject to the list."

Their web site now reflects the change. However, Mrs. Barron did not address my questions regarding the State's position on the DETC. I wonder why!


Pepe

 

Hi AviTerra,

Here are a couple of cases that may interest you. They involve UA schools and Oregon. Of course DETC schools like CCU are NA, however, you may find some parallels to the Texas situation. I would also like to add that known diploma mills should not be listed next to legitimate NA schools.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0335975p.pdf

And this one:


Wednesday, December 22, 2004
Oregon settles with unaccredited universityPortland Business Journal

The state of Oregon has settled a lawsuit with a California-based university that involved how the state treats degrees from unaccredited institutions.

Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers and Kennedy-Western University President Paul Saltman reached an out-of-court settlement of the university's federal district court lawsuit against Myers and Alan Contreras, administrator of the Oregon Student Assistance Commission's Office of Degree Authorization.

KWU, based in Agoura, Calif., filed suit in July 2004 on behalf of three Oregon graduates to challenge a state law that makes it unlawful for a person to represent that he or she has a degree if that degree was granted by an unaccredited university. The lawsuit claimed that the Oregon law violated KWU graduates' constitutional rights by unreasonably restricting their ability to use a lawfully obtained academic credential. Under the settlement agreement, Myers and Contreras agreed that the state would not enforce this statute as long as KWU degree holders disclose their school's nonaccredited status when representing their academic achievement.

The settlement does not require any Oregon employer to accept unaccredited degrees as valid credentials or change the requirements for state employment, professional licensure, college admission or other areas for which a degree from an accredited school is required. Degree holders who fail to disclose that their degrees are from unaccredited schools are still subject to civil and criminal penalties.

In addition, the settlement agreement provides that the Oregon Office of Degree Authorization and Attorney General Myers will make an effort to secure an amendment of the statute during the state's next legislative session that would decriminalize the use of a nonaccredited degree as long as degree holders disclose their schools' nonaccredited status when stating their credentials for business or professional purposes.

According to the terms of the settlement agreement, all issues in the lawsuit will be resolved, and the lawsuit will be dismissed, once the contemplated legislation is passed. If the legislation is not enacted by the end of the 2007 legislative session, the lawsuit will move forward.

Oregon officials are also obligated under the settlement agreement to refrain from characterizing KWU as a "diploma mill." The attorney general's office also agreed to provide ODA personnel with a training session on defamation law.

KWU says it is authorized by the state of Wyoming to offer academic degrees at the bachelor's, master's and doctoral level. The school says it delivers its programs through a combination of online learning and directed study.

There are more where these came from, I pulled these up in about five minutes.

Take care and welcome aboard,

Abner

P.S. One thing to remember. There are many ways to skin a cat. As many have indicated, many voters/taxpayers reside in texas and happen to be NA grads. Let's not forget 2008 is rapidly approaching. I have a feeling this issue will create political pressure on certain people, and this can cause things to change. I know a little something about applying political pressure and how it can change things. I am a leader in the worlds largest, most powerful unions, and when we apply pressure to certain issues, things change! Just food for thought!

 

States don't have to recognize marriages that are sanctioned in other states. Many states, for example, have refused to recognize same-sex marriages, even though such marriages may be legally sanctioned by the State of Massachusetts.

And it's clear that states can restrict the use of college degrees legally granted in other states. In the KWU lawsuit described above, for example, the settlement allowed KWU grads to advertise their degrees in Oregon. But Oregon won the right to require a "disclaimer", stating the unaccredited nature of such degrees.

Personally, I think that someone who holds a valid degree from a legally state-licensed school has a First Amendment right to say so. However, states such as Oregon (or Texas) do have the right to demand disclaimers, if the degree does not meet in-state standards.

This is no different from professional licensing rules. Suppose you are legally licensed as a Professional Engineer in Nevada, but you reside in California, where you are not licensed. You can legally advertise your Nevada license, as long as you make it clear that it is not valid for use in Caliifornia.