While We Were Sleeping: Big Movement In DEAC Land

I believe the current move for naturopaths, and myriad other alternative practitioners, is to offer "wellness coaching" which is not a regulated practice. Of course, I would imagine that once you have an established patient and that relationship develops it is quite possible for all manner of conversations to take place that cross that line into practicing medicine without a license.

But if you're going to be a fake MD you're not going to get a degree like this. This offers no legal protection and requires actual work. if you're going you be a fake MD you might as well just fake the doctorate too.

Afterall, that steroid scandal guy in Florida had a, I believe anyway, legitimate MD from a medical school in the Caribbean. But he had no medical license so it didn't matter. Whether his degree was legitimate or he made one up on his home printer, absent a license, he cannot practice medicine.

 

That's definitely a real concern.

Maybe not that specific one. It's pretty rare. I only know of two accredited Doctorates with that very specific title and the one mentioned in the original post isn't even live yet.

Every now and then you'll get someone with a lower-level license or certification or degree in something (or nothing at all) posing as something higher and it's usually something more impactful to public safety, unfortunately. They get away for a while, then they get caught and try to rationalize it in a similar way that people who get those bogus "life experience" degrees do. "Well, I've been in this field for x amount of years so I know just as much as a <insert higher level practitioner title here>." I typed one scenario "Nurse posing as a Doctor" into Google and got a ton of hits exposing those types of liars.

One that stuck out to me was this fraud, Kyle G. Larsen: https://fox11online.com/news/local/appleton-man-accused-of-posing-as-a-doctor-arrested

Not a Nurse or anything else as far as I know, but he posed as a Psychologist and Medical Doctor. That guy had some real problems to do what he did. Hope he got some help... and a prison sentence if he was deemed sane while doing it.

 

Just curious, where did you see that New York Institute of Art and Design is closing? Their site is still up and taking applications. or are you saying thy are simply no longer accredited by DEAC?

 

New York Institutes of Photography, Art and Design, and Career Development ALL voluntarily withdrew from DEAC Accreditation as of Dec 31, 2022. That's ALL it says: that they're "gone" from DEAC.

I wondered the same thing. The post could have been clearer.
https://deac.org/UploadedDocuments/Public-Notices/Accreditation-Actions/010623_AC_meeting_report.pdf

 

"NYICD is no longer accepting new students but you can still take the next steps toward a new career or further your education with our affordable, online sister school, Penn Foster. With over 130 years of experience in distance education and a broad range of accredited career, college, and certificate programs in in-demand fields, you can open the door to a new job, build industry-recognized skills, and take the next step toward the life you want – still completely online, at your own pace."

https://www.nyicd.edu

I may or may not have prematurely concluded because of the above, because of all three institutes dropping accreditation at the same time, and because they really are all run by the same people, that they were all shutting down together. We'll see. There are times when the sites stay up and appear to be accepting new students but actually aren't. That was the case with American Graduate University for a little while. AGS was run by the same people running Patten, seemed like the site was still active and accepting new students, but it actually wasn't.

In the meantime, the future for the two Institutes continuing to operate without accreditation is very uncertain in my view. Up to $1200 for just one course from unaccredited schools that are barely known to begin with, doesn't sound too enticing.

 

"Barely known?" People I knew, back in the 70s and 80s in my end of Canada were going through N.Y. Institute of Photography 45 years ago. Two went on to professional careers in the business. They had both acquired quite a bit of experience before they signed up - and had nothing but good things to say about the experience. Their instructor's feedback was by tape and was really well-individualized, I was told.

That was around 1978. I'd have gone there too, but night school (regular college) kind of got in the way. Money would have been no problem, as I think the course cost around $300 back then. About 40 years later, I finally earned a Photography diploma from another school. That was enough for me, but I think NYIP is probably a far better school. But my diploma looks nice, anyway.

They've been around - and well-known, for a L-O-N=G time.

 

If you want to see their ads etc - just pick up a camera magazine.

 

And NYIP's two online courses are NOT degree programs. So why do they really need accreditation? Maybe the school came to the same decision I just did....

Yeah, I know DETC/DEAC started out by accrediting non-degree schools. But that was then This is now.

 

What's well-known or not is all relative to certain groups and contexts. If one is into photography, and I'm talking more than taking the typical every day pics with their phone, and they've looked into learning more about it, they're more likely to know about the school, but in the academic world we're discussing I think it's fair to say that they're not well-known. However, my comment was on all three schools as a whole. I have a hard time believing any of them have strong enrollment numbers at this point (well, one we know for sure doesn't now since they're closed) but I'd love to see some data to the contrary.

They must have seen some value in holding accreditation for as long as they did, maybe that's changed, and we'll see what impact that change has on them. But when accreditation is dropped for any school after so many years it's usually not a good sign, plus one of those schools actually did close for sure upon that accreditation drop (NYICD), and suddenly closing is almost always a bad sign.

 

Of course not. They don't offer degrees. They have to be known to people who want to learn photography. People who read photog. magazines, buy cameras etc. Not all of them by a long shot are degree seekers. So they advertise in photog. periodicals, websites devoted to photography and equipment etc. They're pretty well known IN THEIR MARKET.

And that's the place they want to be, need to be and are known. They're not going to suffer from lack of students. Degree seekers have their schools and non-degree-seeking enthusiasts have theirs. They don't HAVE to appeal to degree-seekers. I think they'll do fine without DEAC. They do a helluva job. I'm witness to that.

WELL KNOWN IN THEIR MARKET. NOT FOR DEGREES. WON"T HURT 'EM.

 

Been a long ride with DETC / DEAC and its ancestor, though. NYIP was first accredited by National Home Study Council (which became DETC), when the NHSC was set up in 1956. NYIP is well over 100 years old - it opened its doors in 1910.

Here's a bit from the school, on its history.
https://www.prweb.com/releases/nyip/one-hundred-years/prweb3418544.htm

Little known? I refuse to accept that, categorically. No weasel-clause.

 

Another example of why offering degrees instead of diplomas is often neither necessary nor desirable. Back in the middle of the last century a diploma from any of several correspondence schools would get you started in broadcast engineering. Still will, in fact, but I think CIE is the last to offer a diploma specifically in broadcast technology. Degrees are badly oversold.

 

A problem with "diplomas" is that there is almost zero agreement as to what they are. In what? How long? At what level?

At least with degrees you have some idea.

Some countries have implemented qualifications frameworks that provide such a definition. Here are the levels in just such one (New Zealand):

• Level 1 certificates
• Level 2 certificates
• Level 3 certificates
• Level 4 certificates
• Level 5 certificates and diplomas
• Level 6 certificates and diplomas
• Level 7 graduate certificates, graduate diplomas and Bachelor’s degrees
• Level 8 postgraduate certificates, postgraduate diplomas and Bachelor’s Honours degrees
• Level 9 Master’s degrees
• Level 10 doctoral degrees

The New Zealand Qualifications Authority sets the standards for credentials at each level, then schools apply to have the credentials they offer included in the framework.

Many other countries do this as well, including South Africa, UK, Australia, and the "Asian Tigers." (This is by no means an exhaustive list.) There are books written about the subject.

If the U.S. had a strong qualifications framework, it could work to funnel students (of all ages) into credential ladders leading to entry (and upwards from there) into critical occupational and professional fields. Naturally, much of this could be done outside of traditional college (like at trade schools and the community colleges).

This could be accomplished through a partnership between employers, tertiary education and training institutions, and the government. But hey, who trusts any of them anymore?

In the US we have a "weak qualifications framework," where we have a recognizable college system, but it's largely hit-and-miss on the professional/occupational side. Some jobs/careers are highly regulated (like being an attorney or plumber), others self-regulated (project management, coaching, human resources), and others (like grocery store or restaurant management) where there is no framework at all.

An anecdote: I have a friend I commissioned into the Air Force 30 years ago. He retired as a colonel 6 years ago and has been trying to figure out what to do with himself. He did intel (his military specialty) for contractors and even the federal government, but he really wasn't satisfied with that. He tried tending bar and substitute teaching (thinking he might become a school teacher), but it just didn't click. Then, awhile back, he realized that his love for flying (he had a private pilot's license) and building airplanes ought to be his career. So, in his mid-50s, he enrolled in an airframe and powerplant certificate programs at a local community college. It will take him 3 years to finish, and he's teaching at an aerospace-related charter high school part-time as he does it. When he graduates from the certificate program, he'll likely start a business inspecting and repairing private planes. The two areas he's working in are highly regulated (the high school by the state and the A&P program by the FAA). In other words, there is a path he can follow that is discernable, distinct, and has a defined outcome.

I'd like to see that for many critical fields. But this country has spent the last 4 decades pulling away from funding structured tertiary education. I just don't see how we move towards it.

(NB: The military gets this and always has. That's why occupational fields are extremely well-defined and training--initial and throughout one's career, formal and on-the-job--is thoroughly designed and executed. Then it moves people to the work where and when it is needed, equips and trains them, grows them in their positions and develops them into future roles.)

 

"Degrees are badly oversold." Agreed 100% - and also with Rich's statements about the lack of a qualification framework in the US. Here it's maybe a bit further along the line, but still somewhat fragmented - neither national, nor a full-fledged, numbered framework. Our community colleges offer recognized diplomas and certificates in many occupations - from construction tech. to cardiac sonography. People with these have the key to entry and many do very well.

There are also many private schools offering diplomas in IT, Paralegal, some health tech., office admin. Overall, these tend to be more expensive than Community Colleges. Where licensing is required - it doesn't matter where you got the diploma, as long as it's a known legit, registered school. If it is, you get to write the licensing exam - and if you pass, you're in. Where all you need is the diploma itself, (e.g. office administration) I perceive some preference for a Community College diploma, in hiring.

There is a shift towards degrees - or an option for them, in quite a few tech. fields. Mostly, you get your tech diploma from Community College, then (optional) do 30 credits of University at a cooperating school (night or distance, usually) and you get your B. Tech. A few colleges in my Province (Ontario) are teaching some 4-year degrees - all in-house. My granddaughter is enrolled in one of these.

Nursing has undergone a change. It used to be a 3-year Community College program with clinicals at local hospitals. It's now a 4-year BSN degree.

 

Well, he was an intel guy, not a pilot. And he was a reservist for a lot of that time, so he worked as an analyst out of uniform, too.

One of the things I work with my clients on is their professional identities. In strong organizational cultures, like the military, your identity is practically handed to you. Then it is reinforced constantly. If you're wearing a dress uniform, I can take one look and know:

• How much you earn
• How many years you've served
• What you do
• The level at which you do it
• Where you've done it
• How well you've done it

It is really hard to break from that and find your own identity. As for the airplane issue, the vast majority of Air Force personnel do not fly. It is utterly normal to serve an entire career without flying in a military aircraft.

Then there's the service aspect. For a decade or more, you're doing what your country asks you to do. Yes, you're paid and fed, but you don't have a lot of options to exercise your own choices about it. It can happen, but it's rare. For example, another of my former students was a missileer, which he hated. (For good reasons.) He got out of it by leaving active duty, going to law school, and coming back to the Air Force Reserve as a JAG. Pretty dramatic.

So, yeah, it's a little ironic, especially from the outside. But inside it is a really powerful dynamic and not everyone sorts it out quickly....or even at all.

 

It's worse, but for different reasons.

Subs, as we all can imagine, involve cramped quarters, limited entertainment, hard work, and almost no "off" time.

Missiles have that, but for days, not weeks, at a time. But...missiles are lonely places, staffed by only a few crew members. Also, missileers are constantly running exercises and being evaluated. Then there's the persistent knowledge testing. (There was a test cheating scandal a few years ago that got a lot of officers dismissed.) There is so much pressure on the job; they have higher suicide and drug use rates than the rest of the Air Force.

Two of my former students married while still cadets. Upon commissioning, they both went into missiles. They eventually divorced and both left the missile field as well. Not sure if they were divorcing each other or the missile field. Probably both.