Why did you choose your college or university?

I was pointing out the fact that these so-called "red flags" may not actually indicate a problem.

 

My experience is with UoP. Having taught dozens of courses over several years, having been responsible for faculty training, facutly evaluation, and administration, having done an MBA at a practioner-focused school, and having a doctorate in nontraditional higher education, I can say with confidence that the education gained through UoP is comparable to that offered through not-for-profit schools. I haven't been involved with UoP for 20 years and certainly have no dog in this hunt, but there it is.

 

Of course. This is why anecdotes don't matter much. There are so many different opinions based on personal experiences, even if those experiences occurred at similar places. I've taught at public universities and a for-profit, and I've taken courses at...I've lost count...maybe 20+ different colleges and universities, including community colleges, for-profit colleges, and traditional state universities. I've also earned degrees in many different majors (STEM and non-STEM) ranging from associate's to doctorates. Additionally, I have taught STEM and non-STEM courses. Still, that isn't enough to have a representative sample. This is why I prefer to rely on empirical research and analyses of business practices.

 

That would actually contribute to bias. I'm not saying that you're biased, but people who dislike UoP would see this as evidence of bias because you're ultimately defending yourself.

 

Not necessarily. One of the skills one acquires in doing doctoral research is the ability to recognize and account for one's biases. Also, because I haven't worked there in almost 20 years, I have no personal interest in the matter. My 3-year relationship with the school neither enhances nor detracts from anything else I'm doing, have done, or will ever do. It's just not that big of a deal.

There is no objectivity in human society. Even so-called "objective" multiple choice exams are loaded with subjectivity.

We can offer assertions and assessments about phenomena. Assertions can be confirmed or denied. Assessments can be accepted and rejected. If I offer an assertion about UoP, all you have to know is whether or not I'm a reliable reporter. If I offer an assessment, you have to decide if I've accounted for any bias, and if I'm someone who can expertly draw that assessment.

Take this extreme example: who is in the best position to testify about a mob boss? His underlings, often through cooperation deals. And what do defense attorneys attack? The credibility of the witness because of their own criminal background and the deal they struck with the prosecution. But that doesn't necessarily mean their testimony should be ignored.

The only reason I can talk about UoP with the thoroughness and accuracy that I do is because of my experience there. If my assertions and assessments are to be dismissed because of that experience, fine. But then people will be limited to uninformed perspectives, which is why we read a lot of false crap about that particular school.

 

Yes, you learn how to account for one's biases by doing things such as double blind studies, not having the person overseeing the experiment participate in the experiment (Stanford Prison Experiment), and look at inter-rater reliability.

 

I think Bakke is great. At the time, the certificate was affordable and the work was really thorough and enjoyable. I'd do their doctorate in a heartbeat if I could afford it!

 

Yes, the degrees at the time, when state-approved, were relatively inexpensive and the accreditation was a boast to lots of graduates. I suspect CCU makes lots of profit as a DEAC school. They likely could make the switch to regional but probably not likely given their success. I think your assessment is right on. CCU has come a long ways.

PS - quite a few recent graduates seem to be going on to transfer to regionally accredited schools. I noticed one of recent who got a teaching job in a traditional elementary school.

 

That's good to hear. Thank you. I have been salivating over the DTL for a long time. I wish they were RA, but the program looks so good it may not matter to me in the end.

 

They are TRACS accredited if that helps.

 

I know they are, thank you. I wish they were RA of course, but I'm ok with TRACS for a degree like this.

 

There are few schools that have accreditation from this place. I would stay away from this, a NACES evaluator normally goes with the location of the school for accreditation purposes. If the school is registered in Delaware, it makes no sense that is accredited by Kyrgyz or any other tiny nation. It is fine if you have accreditation from other nations but the school in question should have accreditation by the local authority to be credible. I can imagine putting in my CV that I have a PhD from Pebble Hills University located in Delaware but the accreditation comes from Kyrgyz, I am not so sure if the interview will go any further after the prospect employer learns about this.
If Azteca or any other school has a campus in a foreign country, this is acceptable but the school in question should make it very clear that the degree comes from a Mexican school that has a campus in a foreign country. In the case of Pebble Hills, it claims to be a US school but accredited by a tiny nation.
Foreign evaluation services are going to be more careful about these loopholes and blacklist schools just abusing the system.

 

In general, European countries have something that is called nostrification. This is a validation of your degree from a foreign school that gives you the degree so you can use it in the European country. You can try Charles University that is a prestigious school in Poland:
https://cuni.cz/uken-16.html

You really don't get a new diploma like the one from Azteca but a document that recognizes your degree as the same as the one given by Charles University. Technically, you can say that is a Charles University degree but you don't get a diploma but just a letter that explains that your degree now is recognized as a degree from the foreign school.

This is true origin of validation. Azteca and other similar schools, use the same model but they go further by actually printing the diploma under their name. However, they lack legal value. On the other hand, Nostrification is legal so you can have a real degree from Charles University with Nostrification. However, Charles University is not going to validate your PhD from Pebble Hills or any no name school. They actually ask you for your dissertation and a committee will evaluate if your dissertation is worth their doctorate. It is like a second examination of your doctoral thesis by experts of Charles University.

 

Azteca would validate any legal issued degree.
their criteria is pretty flexible:

• a nationally recognised IAU listed university;
• a nationally recognised and accredited institution of postsecondary education;
• a state approved or lisensed institution of postsecondary education with degree awarding powers;
• an institution of postsecondary education with institutional accreditation by an accrediting agency recognised or listed by any government authority or board in charge of recognising accrediting agencies, or listed and recognised by CHEA, ENQA or INQAAHE;
• an institution of postsecondary education offering programmes with programmatic accreditation by an accrediting agency recognised or listed by any government authority or board in charge of recognising accrediting agencies, or listed and recognised by CHEA, ENQA or INQAAHE;
• or the degree subject to validation is
• any degree awarded that has already been evaluated and recognised by an officially recognised credentials evaluation service, e.g. NACES, NARIC, OFQUAL or Professional and Regulatory Bodies.

Technically, a PhD from a state licensed US university but not accredited could be validated. However, their degrees lack legal value as they are not recognized by the ministry of education of Mexico.

Azteca is quite expensive for just a piece of paper, Nostrification from a place like Charles University is way cheaper and legal.

 

To be fair, unless your employer is a degree nerd like us they'll probably never even learn of the accreditation.

 

Yes, but if I want to use my degree to teach or to get a license, I would need to get a NACES evaluation. The first thing is that a NACES evaluator would not evaluate a US degree, so if I am an American school with a foreign accreditation, this can be itself the end of the story.
Many of these schools make deals with places like California University FCE, so the American school can be evaluated as a an RA american school. This makes no sense as the American school should not be evaluated as a foreign credential but California University FCE does this.
There is a history in this forum about similar schemes like the Liberia accreditation that was abused by many American schools too.

 

You are right, more than tiny the real adjective is "questionable". There are also quite a few online universities claiming accreditation from Zambia or other African countries. The trick here is to get some kind of government accreditation so you can get a NACES evaluation that can be converted into a work permit for the USA.
In general, any university that claims a registration in one place but accreditation in other, it would be questionable. Many schools register in Delaware but then get accreditation from foreign countries. The idea is to sell an American degree that leads to an RA equivalency from a NACES or similar service so the prospect student can claim an American RA (equivalent) degree. As some have stated here, the average employer would not know the difference between an RA and a RA equivalent degree so the Delaware degree with the RA equivalent from Zambia might do the trick for some. People are getting very clever and playing the system to sell degrees.

 

If the DEAC accreditation is on top of the local accreditation, this is fine. Many foreign schools have american RA accreditation. Woolf is properly registered in Malta according to their website:
"Woolf is an accredited, degree-granting Higher Education Institution with license number 2019-015. Woolf (MT) is based in Malta, which has been a member of the European Union since 2004, and of the European Higher Education Area since 2010. Woolf’s degrees are fully integrated with the ECTS system. The Registrar’s office for Woolf (MT) is located at 66, Old Theatre Street, Valletta VLT 1427, Malta. Woolf is a collegiate higher education institution, in the tradition of Oxford and Cambridge."

The issue would be if the school is in Malta claiming to be an European School but the accreditation comes a country in Africa or Latin America. When you send your degree for evaluation, the evaluation service would look for local accreditation first. If Woolf would registered in an African country but conducting business in Europe, this is fine but this would be tagged as an African school and not European.

The issue is deception, a school registered in the USA but claiming accreditation in Kyrgyz just gives the impression of a school trying to deceive you by making you believe that it is an American school so the question here is why they don't register in Kyrgyz and claim to be a Kyrgyz's university conducting business in the USA.