Wyoming Legislator Slams Accreditation

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by russ, Feb 10, 2005.

Loading...
  1. russ

    russ New Member

    I am not necessarily arguing against accreditation, I am arguing for acceptance of non-regional accreditation and the validity/integrity of a college who chooses not to pay the regionals or anyone else to accredit them.

    Let's say you were to start a college (and all new colleges start unaccredited) and you enticed some knowledgeable professors to teach your classes for your new school on the hill who taught from the same textbooks as any other accredited college. The state comes in, reviews your curriculum and authorizes you and your new institution to confer bachelor of science degrees in business. After four years, your first graduating class celebrates their hard work and graduate with your newly minted degrees in hand. End of story, right? Wrong.

    One of your students tries to get a job in Oregon with their unaccredited BS degree in business. The ODA, since they have not reviewed the new school and as final arbiter of all true knowledge, charges your student with a misdemeanor for using an unaccredited degree on their resume when they applied for jobs in Oregon. Happy ending? At least at this point the ODA does not have the power to throw the student in jail (not yet anyway).

    Education should not start looking like a police state where you have not only your employer reviewing your resume but the state looking over your shoulder as well. Employers are very capable of checking references, including where you went to school, without the assistance of the state. As any of us in the professional world knows, it is not the degree that gets you the professional license, you must pass the licensing test. That is your 'standard' whether you are a pilot, CPA, lawyer or doctor.
     
  2. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Indeed. David Hapgood described (and decried) this in his now-out-of-print book, Diplomaism (Brown, 1971). Nothing's changed, except that it's gotten worse. The internet, with all of its job sites, is a big player. An ad in a local paper that might attract dozens (or fewer) candidates is now placed online where it can attract thousands.

    Degrees are a shortcut when sorting through these application. How effective they are is debatable, of course. But what is not debatable is the need to be sure that the degrees presented represent the learning they purport to.

    There are some fine unaccredited schools (dwindling these days, as more legitimate DL schools get accredited), and there are some terrific graduates of them. But such instances are not proof. A good school's lack of accreditation is not proof that a lack of education is good.
     
  3. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    "Regional accreditation lacks quality." "Legislator slams accreditation." "Would I trust a surgeon if he did not have an accredited degree? Absolutely, I don't think accreditation has anything to do with his or her skill level."

    Coulda fooled me.

    And I asked you how you propose that people go about distinguishing between good non-accredited schools and mills. You still haven't answered.

    Again, you are avoiding the most important point.

    The school and the graduate might think that they know something about this hypothetical school's standards. But what happens when the graduate walks out into the world and tries to use his or her degree? If the graduate tells prospective employers or clients that he or she has a university degree, presumably that statement says something about the graduate's education. But what, exactly? How can everyone who has never even heard of this particular school of yours know whether or not it's credible or just a mill?

    OK. So how should an employer go about judging non-accredited universities?

    Wouldn't replacing university degrees with state licensing examinations be a major contradiction of your laissez-faire-ish principles?

    If it pisses you off that a state might insist that university degrees be accredited (whether that applies to degrees granted within the state or used there), then how can you suggest that a state not allow anyone to work unless they pass a state exam?

    Besides, if we insist on licensing exams for every single field in which university degrees are relevant (it's hard to see how that would be practical), then what additional value would degrees have on top of that? You seem to be arguing against the whole idea of university degrees, whether accredited or not.
     
  4. russ

    russ New Member

    I am not suggesting the state or profession require an exam, it is just a fact that they do so. For those who think the accredited degree is an end-all for competency - that is not true. Competency in almost all professions is certified by some sort of licensing exam. This answers the objections of those who ask how you can trust whether or not someone is competent to provide a professional service if they don't get an accredited degree. This is the standard they can rely on - not the degree.

    As I mentioned on another post, a private agency could be established (like the consumer credit agency) to verify the validity or integrity of degree for a nomimal fee. Employers could pay this fee to check on a degree listed on a resume. The reputation and credibility of the agency would be the check to keep it from listing diploma mills as legitimate. The last thing you want is 50 different states setting their own bureaucratic standards which is what is starting to happen now.

    This private agency would list unaccredited schools as legitimate if they actually required coursework, had a professional staff and were authorized by their state of domicile to confer degrees. Diploma mills, who would not meet these standards, would be listed as such. Again (and again) accreditation is voluntary. No state should be requiring a legitimate school to become accredited.

    If we trust our credit records with a private agency, I think we can build a system that is just as trustworthy for higher education. Yes, there will be problems and complaints but, in my humble opinion, it would be superior to the system (or lack of one) we have now.

    Maybe Dr. John Bear would like to create it (as long as I get royalties).
     
  5. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Don't expect many. Lawsuits, perhaps. But not many customers.
     
  6. russ

    russ New Member

    Ah, there is always the skeptic. I guess you won't be investing then.

    ACCREDITATION (I hate to shout like that) does not solve the problem which is exactly why Oregon came up with the bad idea of creating the ODA. Since many of you defend the creation of this state bureaucracy (but don't have to pay for it) then you should be in agreement that accreditation cannot help identify legitimate unaccredited schools and diploma mills.

    Your point is simply this, unless you are accredited, you should have no legitimacy. That is the ultimate institutional response that decries anyone who would challenge the status quo.

    Another person posted that it is because the regionals have the power you have to play by their rules. That is probably the best case for accreditation. When employers, the government and other institutions decide that accreditation of a degree is required for any employment and the institutionalism becomes solidified, then the idea that accreditation is voluntary becomes quaint and historic but will have no meaning. That will be a sad day for education in this country.
     
  7. ..........................................................................
    UNITED STATES PUBLIC LAWS
    105th Congress - Second Session
    Convening January 27, 1998
    HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1998
    "TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS
    "PART A--DEFINITIONS
    << 20 USCA § 1001 >>

    "SEC. 101. GENERAL DEFINITION OF INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

    "(a) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.--For purposes of this Act, other than title IV, the term "institution of higher education" means an educational institution in any State that--

    "(1) admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate;

    "(2) is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education;:D

    "(3) provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor's degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree;

    "(4) is a public or other nonprofit institution; and

    "(5) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted preaccreditation status by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the granting of preaccreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time.
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I said "independent third-party endorsement" and one reply was:

    Sure. But I don't think that's the only fons honorum possible.

    In my particular field, the research itself is far more important than the pedigree of the degree(s) one holds. I was not cited in at least 3 doctoral dissertations in 2004 because of or despite my ACU doctorate. I was cited because my research is known in the field, and because it is on the cutting edge. There's no substitute for that in my field.
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    It's a shame, too. I have a lot of respect for solid academic achievement, but I have no less respect when those same achievements are made by the unlettered.
     
  10. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    The regionals have their power because they stepped into a void and filled it. This is something that dates back a half-century to a century or more.

    I agree that the idea of "voluntary" accreditation is absurd. Degree mill shills often describe it as such as a means for justifying their schools' lack of it. It isn't supposed to be voluntary (in the purest sense). Again, your willingness to disprove your position is, well, re-assuring. Thanks!:cool:
     
  11. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Oh, I agree so much. Bucky Fuller, for example, is one of my personal heroes.

    What I do not respect is supposed academic achievement pretending to be real.
     
  12. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    A better measure, and one more accurate, might be to survey them all and then report. Why rely on intermediaries to filter your results?
     
  13. russ

    russ New Member

    Gee, a history lesson, and so specific about time frames too. This must be what you did your dissertation on. Thanks for informing us uneducated masses who may only have one associate and one bachelors.


    I see, you prove your legitimacy by becoming accredited but if you never said unaccredited schools were not legitimate. I guess unaccredited schools can become "established" which is really not the same as legitimate, is it? I am sure that was just a slip up.

    Yea, Rich, you are just too smart for me. By the way, it is reassuring not re-assuring.
     
  14. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Voluntary accreditation is absurd? It isn't "supposed" to be (heels clicking) voluntary?

    There are no proofs in this thread but assertions so russ can't have disproved himself.
     
  15. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    To Russ: Actually, Rich knows the difference between research and logomachy. He's also open about his affiliations. Are you? All your threads are attacks on regional accreditation. For whom do you work? Where are your degrees from?

    To Decimon: Would you explain your "heel clicking" reference? What are you saying? I do not understand.
     
  16. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Who determines what is "supposed" to be voluntary, janko?

    Voluntarism is Americanism. Command and control is alien.

    Did you truly not understand?
     
  17. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    What old movie was that...the Wizard of Oz?...where the heroine clicked her heels together three times?

    But I sense that you are going more for the Prussian dueling scar imagery here.

    Pedantic philosophical point: It's arguable that Russ has been asserting a self-contradictory set of propositions. And first semester logic tells us that all the members of an inconsistent proposition set can't be true at the same time.

    I will say that I'm inclined to agree with Decimon contra Douglas here. I don't find the concept of voluntary accreditation absurd at all.

    But there's really no reason why any non-accredited schools have to be accepted as credible, unless some convincing alternative to accreditation is provided. Even then, as I argued up above in my response to Quinn, acceptance and respect are most apt to be found in small specialized communities that are familiar with the particular non-accredited school and with its alternative evidence of credibility, whatever that is.
     
  18. russ

    russ New Member

    Actually, with Rich's educational pedigree, I think he knows the meaning of the words he uses. Those words are also quite revealing about his true beliefs notwithstanding his denials.

    My educational pedigree is not important. I can assure you that I don't have any vested interest in a diploma mill nor do I advocate for them.

    I am not against RAs, I am against only RAs. The RAs are not independent and totally objective in their standards, they were formed by the schools themselves. For those of you who wish to have federal or national standards, it is the RAs that fight tooth and nail against that. They like their system the way it is. I would be interested in a more objective and independent method of evaluating higher education.
     
  19. russ

    russ New Member

    Thanks, decimon. I owe you one.
     
  20. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I'm not saying that having voluntary accreditation is absurd. I'm saying that the stance often taken by degree mills that accreditation is merely voluntary, making it a moot point (and, thus, something their customers should dismiss).

    Technically, accreditation is voluntary (at least in some states). But, in toto, it is absurd to assert that it is voluntary. Unless one wishes to run an unrecognized university, of course. And, as Bill points out, there are a few schools that seem to do this quite nicely.
     

Share This Page