Jump to content

Talk:Distance Education Accrediting Commission

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dept. of Education's "Equivalence of DETC and regional accreditation"

[edit]

"The Criteria do not differentiate between types of accrediting agencies, so the recognition granted to all types of accrediting agencies-regional, institutional, specialized, and programmatic-is identical. Only the specific scope of recognition varies according to the type of agency recognized."

Above is the text of the Dept. of Education letter which the anon user purports to use for the proposition that the DETC and regional accreditation are equivalent, well in the eyes of the Department of Education which incidentally has nothing to do with the academic or transfer of credit affairs of any school. Thus, what the Department of Education thinks about accreditation is irrelevant. The letter appears to be solicited by the DETC to make the argument that because the Dept. of Education's Criteria for recognition of an accrediting agency is the "same" for all accreditors, then all accreditation is the same. Secondly, the letter clearly states in the second sentence that "... the specific scope of recognition varies according to the type of agency recognized." Thus the scope of recognition varies according to the type, sooooooooo, all accreditation is apparently not the same, contrary to the first statement. Criteria for inclusion as an accrediting agency has to do with Dept. of Education regulation and has nothing to do with the academics of the schools which are being accredited or the particular criteria applied by the accreditors to decide what school it will accredit.

According to the anon users' scenario and the letter purporting to support it, an accrediting agency which only accredits certificate granting vocational schools and there are some, would be equivalent to the American Bar Association or, in effect, a massage school is equivalent to Harvard Law School. This is, of course, ludicrous. What is relevant are the accrediting criteria of the particular accrediting body, the criteria which schools accredited by that body have to meet. There is obviously a difference between the accrediting criteria of an accreditor who accredits certificate granting purely vocational schools and the accrediting criteria of the American Bar Association, just as there are differences between the criteria of the DETC and other national accrediting agencies and that of a a regional accrediting agency. The Department of Education merely recognizes an accrediting agency for the purpose of whether or not the students attending schools accredited by that particular agency can receive federal loans and grants. The Dept. of Ed. does not pass judgment on the equivalence of the criteria of one accreditor vs. another. Mysteryquest 16:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could not agree more. Great job. -- J (talk) 21:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve noticed some individuals just don’t understand the criteria involved to be recognized by either the USDOE or CHEA. Some believe scope’s referring to institutional evaluations, when it’s actually referring to the method of the educational process (degree granting vs. non degree granting). The same criteria are used to evaluate national (degree granting) and regional (degree granting) accreditors. The only difference I’ve noticed is some degree granting national agencies also approve vocational schools (issuing diplomas or certificates). On the other hand, regional accreditors try to separate non-degree vs. degree granting institutions (as demonstrated below). The scope and evaluation process is different concerning the vocational portion but the same for the degree granting portion. If not mistaken, a couple of regional agencies did (maybe still do) lump vocational and degree granting schools in the past. The only noticeable distinction is DETC accredits through the professional doctoral degree level (DBA, Ed.D. etc.), whereas the regionals accredit through the PhD level. That said, the same criteria is used to evaluate each agency up to the level authorized.

The Distance Education and Training Council (DETC): Scope of Recognition: postsecondary institutions in the United States that offer degree programs primarily by the distance education method Up to and including the professional doctoral degree.

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Higher Education Scope of recognition: the accreditation and preaccreditation ("Candidate for Accreditation") of institutions of higher education in specified States and a limited number of freestanding American-style institutions abroad that are chartered or licensed by an appropriate agency within the Middle States region.

Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Secondary Schools Scope of recognition: the accreditation and preaccreditation ("Candidate for Accreditation") of public vocational/technical schools offering non-degree, postsecondary education in the Middle States region (specified States).Jack1237 (talk) 13:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any objections to deleting the following section. It would keep this article in line with other accreditation bodies, plus the reference is no longer available. Everything from: "The difference between regional and national accreditation is simple.............But at the core, the accreditations are very similar, and both are virtually identical in philosophy and scope of activity. So to hastily express one more acceptable or better than another is not entirely accurate.[6]" Hilarious Bookbinder (talk) 02:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Not only is that source unavailable, but http://www.military-advanced-education.com/ (which appears to have been the source for the last 4 paragraphs of the article) does not impress me as a particularly reliable source for this topic. I would hate to eviscerate this article; ideally, the article could be rewritten, and the POV-ish verbiage about comparisons with regional accreditation would be replaced with WP:RS content -- information about DETC's accreditation program and third-party statements about it. --Orlady (talk) 02:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I support the deletion of that section. The reference is no longer available, and some of it isn't written in a encyclopedia tone. MOOOOOPS (talk) 02:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article Needs Less Opinion, More Citation

[edit]

"Today, it’s reported that about 70% of DETC graduates are successful in transferring credits and the reasons why regionally accredited schools are so reluctant are because of prejudice, ignorance or anti-competitiveness. Clearly, the vast majority of employers do view DETC as being equal, and they vote with their dollars, since DETC institutions are routinely accepted for the tuition reimbursement programs in most corporations today."

The first sentence is obviously loaded with slanted opinion. The second needs a citation to verify its accuracy. The subjectiveness of this conent makes it hard to trust anything else this article says about the DETC, especially since it's one of the first things a reader sees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.134.215.29 (talk) 19:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These were statements made by someone with a very slanted opinion. I assume that making that clear will be sufficient? Regards, TallMagic (talk) 23:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with this article is that DETC is just not very important and therefore doesn't have many verifiable sources. That is why the current article has to depend so heavily on Michael Lamberts seemingly selfserving type comments. My opinion on them is that they are close enough to the truth that with the source being properly cited, I think the statements are okay for the article. I'll look around again for some more sources. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 00:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I took out some of the more contention language because the source is not independent and is also self-serving. I do not feel the statements are okay or close to the truth and am not sure either my opinion or other editors opinions matter. The issue is whether or not most regionally accredited schools accept DETC credits not whether or not they are actually equivalent. If a student attends a DETC school expecting to easily transfer their credits to a regionally accredited school they are not going to be consoled by an argument that the accredtiations are similar. The independent sources say most regionally accredited schools do not accept DETC credits. More weight should be given to independent sources vs. self serving sources.Mysteryquest (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your arguments. The independent (but not Wikipedia reliable sources) sources that I've seen seem to indicate that over the last few years that acceptability of DETC credits and credentials are enjoying some improved utility. For example, THECB (Texas) considered DETC degrees illegal in Texas until recently. Still, DETC is second rate in utility compared to RA. To my mind, Lambert's assertions/pledding for equality indicates that DETC is still inferior utility compared to RA. Since that is all we have, I think that some of it should stay. BTW, I looked through a couple of Google searchs and didn't come up with anything. One thing that I'd really like to add is something along the lines of there's about 100 DETC schools compared to probably 100,000's of RA schools but, I can't come up with a figure for the number of RA schools either. :-( Regards, TallMagic (talk) 03:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)I agree that it is best to have independent reliable source for the expressed opinion. It's not necessarily a biased opinion, though (i.e., the opinion may be a balanced judgment, even though expressed by someone with a conflict of interest). Lambert is pointing to a very natural and to-be-expected situation. Regional accrediting agencies are formed by and ultimately dependent upon the schools they accredit. These are generally brick-and-mortar schools, with high investment in physical and very local presence. DETC was formed back in the 1920s as an association of correspondence schools. Such schools, even if providing similar academic supervision, would have lower operating costs. Further, their presence was national (or international), so not only did regional accreditation not make sense for them, generally, but they would be asking for accreditation from an organization of their competitors, who definitely considered education by mail to be inferior. In any case, there are many unaccredited distance learning schools, some probably decent, some approaching diploma mill status. It's difficult to get DETC accreditation, many schools try and fail. DETC recommends that any student who needs to meet the requirements of some specific agency, school for transfer credits, or employer verify that their certificate or diploma from any school be considered acceptable before spending their time and money on a course. DETC would probably know, better than anyone else, what percentage of students find their degrees acceptable, I think they track this stuff, and the 70% figure doesn't indicate that 30% got ripped off. The DETC CEO claimed that The average percent of students saying that they reached their learning goals climbs every year, and we expect it to reach an average of 97% when we get the figures in next February. (in the About.com interview cited in the article.) So the 30% may represent students who did not apply for transfer credits, perhaps their education was done, for example. It's not clear what it means from the article. The article, by the way, is awful as to the quality of writing. Maybe we should take a correspondence course in how to write. I'll work on it if I have time.

Well, the way I see if, if there is no valid, independent source for information, then that doesn't give us license to stick our own personal opinions in. Lambert's interview is pure advocacy and does not remotely independent or unbiased. There is no balance in it whatsoever nor would one expect there to be. His job is to advocate his company's virtues, not provide balanced commentary or reporting.Mysteryquest (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Ok I have to ask, on the regional accreditation page does it have a comparison to DETC? or is this just on the DETC page because the person who wrote believes that the DETC is inferior. We all know that a degree from one University will not always transfer to another University. My credit from U of Phx and AIU both regional accredited would not transfer to the State University I wanted to go to. So it just seems a little biased to have this in the article. It makes them(DETC)look bad or inferior. It is like comparing apples to a table lamp, what makes the regionals so great? They meet the same standards set in placed by the USDE and Chea. Heck the USDE is in talks about one regional approval as I type this. By the way, many schools have both NA and RA status. --Super (talk) 01:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of schools in the USA are RA. There are about 100 relatively small schools accredited by DETC. It is important, I believe, to make sure that RA is described in the article. I reread it and no where does it say that DETC is inferior even though it is inferior from the utility/reputation point of view. You're plain wrong about having the same standards. That is just plain untrue. It is also untrue that many schools have both DETC and RA status. You can't just make up stuff and then think that it is true. Please note that I don't think that the article should say that DETC is inferior from the perspective of utility/reputation. TallMagic (talk) 03:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In answer to your question "what makes the regionals so great?" Let me restate the question more reasonably. Why does RA have more acceptance/reputation/utility than DETC? I think the primary answer is that DETC is relatively small and unknown. The secondary reason, in my opinion, is that the few schools accredited by DETC are small, not real notable, and generally in the lower tier of schools from the reputation point of view. TallMagic (talk) 18:13, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Make stuff up? Well Western Governors has both, American Public University has both, Ellis University has both, American Military University has both, so I guess I am making all this up? They meet the exact same standards with the UsDE. Big difference is the DETC only accredits distance education. That’s the difference, the only difference. The head of the US dept of Education says they have and both meet the same standerds [1]. DETC member schools are eligible for Title IV funds just like regional’s. That means that if they want the could charge $400-500 a credit hour just like regional’s but they don't. They run about $80-100 an hour. Very few college won't take DETC credits anymore, when you hear about credit transfer issue about %90 of that is from other NA accreditors. You make a strong statement about how you do not think they meet the same standards , I have provided proof they do, you claim I am making information up, I showed you I was not. What say you now? Yes it believe as well as the DETC that they have more strict standards in place for distance education then the RA's do. In an RA distance program you can have anyone taking your exams. In a DETC program you have to take your exam in front of a proctor. In no way am I comparing Harvard or any other 1st or 2nd tier college to DETC school. There are 1,000s of low performing and lower tier RA schools that are surpassed daily by DETC schools. I can see by your other post on this page that you are in no way anti-DETC, as I am not anti-RA's. I do not think the DETC should be able to award degrees above the 2 year level but thats my opinion. As far as that goes, I thing the no RA should be able to have more than a 2 year program online. I did not like you saying that I made anything up.--Super (talk) 01:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Super, the standards for DETC are set by DETC. The standards for the regionals are set by each individual regional. These standards are NOT the same. They are not set by CHEA nor by US Department of Education. I'm not saying that one is better than the other. I'm simply stating a fact and that fact is that they are not the same. They are self set. These standards are not imposed by the US department of education nor by CHEA. The three schools that you list, I believe are probably the complete set that are both RA and DETC. I do not consider three to fall into the category of "many". It is true that I'm not anti-DETC. I have tried to do a Google search of DETC and really came up close to empty. So I'm at a bit of a loss as to how the article can be improved without further information. I would not like deleting information currently in the article. If you would like to change the name of the section that you reference or reorganize information, I would be totally open to that. Other suggestions would also be welcomed. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 02:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just think the section that discusses that can be shortened, yes you are correct they are not one of the biggest but by that standard they are one of the more well known. No they have to meet certain standards set by the USDE as she states in the letter she wrote to the DETC which I referenced above. She clearly talks about standards as did I. My thing is we are talking about two different beasts here. The other NA's accredited brick and mortar schools too. The DETC is all online/distance. There has never been one suit filed against a DETC school for credit transfer issues. The other NA's have had a ton. I am asking for it to be cleaned and shortened. As it does give the impression they are substandard. In my first post I pointed out I am stuck with RA credits that won't transfer, to other RA's schools, so do we need to put that in all the RA's pages. I can add other examples of RA's not transferring to other RA's but I feel I have made my point. Why can't we just write that not all DETC credits are guaranteed transfer, just like Harvard is not going to take credits from BFE Community College. For profits have changed the game and a lot of for profit RA schools are having credit transfer problems, case in point me! So by what is written it just makes it sound that RA is the better accreditor which there are not facts that they are.Thanks for the exchange TallMagic as it seems we work/edit in the same area, we have to work together.--Super (talk) 04:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reread the section "Comparing DETC with regional accreditation" and disagree it gives the impression that DETC is substandard. Of more concern to DETC graduates is acceptance of degrees. That should probably be more of the focus. The section consists primarily of a quote by Mike Lambert who is the head of DETC and then talks about a CHEA program that was put into place after being proposed and fostered by the DETC. That shows to me that the DETC is concerned about this issue and are actively making improvements. Which I personally believe have resulted in improved acceptance. I would never disagree with trying to clean up any article. TallMagic (talk) 14:02, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, after reading and thinking about what you said, I believe you are right. The focus should be about degree acceptance. Whether that may be good or bad. I think it's about 75%/25% Good/Bad. You might have a different opinion though. It should also be made clear these are vocational degrees not academic degrees as some would like them to be perceived. The goal of going to a DETC school is to gain vocational training in most cases. That’s why it is not right to try to make the comparisons to any RA’s. --Super (talk) 20:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that your point about DETC covering vocational training is an excellent point. Although regarding your last sentence, DETC does accredit liberal arts colleges, therefore, I think the comparison to RA is still valid. TallMagic (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://detc.org/downloads/publications/GriffithsLetter.pdf
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Distance Education Accrediting Commission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:32, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Distance Education Accrediting Commission. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Distance_Education_Accrediting_Commission&oldid=1206983659"