06-11-2010, 11:07 AM
Take a look at the full report by the IG's office, available here.
The cartel shill spin on this seems to be that the IG is being unreasonable by suggesting that NCACS should be abolished just because one of those evil for-profits got caught in the ringer. But that is a totally inaccurate picture.
In fact, the IG's office has been on NCACS' case since at least 2002. Not for the activities of for-profits, but for NCACS' own lack of concrete and specific accreditation standards.
This is about as damning an indictment of an accreditation organization as one could imagine.
No specific standards. Hence no ability to compare institutional performance. And no ability to distinguish between compliant and noncompliant institutions.
Then (to borrow from Edwin Starr) what is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
This goes to the very root of the justification for accreditation in the first place. You need somebody to tell you what to do, the clones whine. You need big brother to wave his mighty hand and approve what you study and learn, and ultimately what you think. Now we are finding out the TRUTH, that accreditation agencies cannot distinguish between compliant and noncompliant, because there are no specific standards for comparing.
TESC = Harvard = St. Regis = UoPhoenix!! They are all the same in the eyes of the inept, incompetent, insubordinate accreditation agencies, because the accreditation agencies have no ability to tell them apart!
NCACS ignored the specific suggestions for improvement and thumbed it nose at the IG. They probably figured this notion of "standards" was something peculiar the Bush administration and would blow away in the winds of hope and change.
Surprise!
What if the Obamunist regime finally notices that their socialist pals in the higher ed cartel are being exposed as a public fraud and sham? Will somebody decide to "put their boot on the neck" of the IG, as Interior Secretary Ken Salazar so artfully put it?
Considering how well that's working out for Salazar it might not be much cause for concern. Let's hope the IG sticks to her guns and keeps pressing NCACS to begin doing it's job.
NCACS, either stand for something or stand aside. If you can't or won't do the job then quit pretending. "Unaccredited" has more value than "no standards sham accredited."
The cartel shill spin on this seems to be that the IG is being unreasonable by suggesting that NCACS should be abolished just because one of those evil for-profits got caught in the ringer. But that is a totally inaccurate picture.
In fact, the IG's office has been on NCACS' case since at least 2002. Not for the activities of for-profits, but for NCACS' own lack of concrete and specific accreditation standards.
Quote:In 2002, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a final management information report entitled, North Central Association of Colleges and Schools’ Accreditation Standards for Student Achievement and Program Length (ED-OIG/A09-C0016). The review found that HLC’s standards that encompass student achievement and program length were general and did not include specific measures to be met by institutions. The report stated that, as a result, HLC’s established standards inherently limited the agency’s ability to compare institutional performance and distinguish between compliant and noncompliant institutions. We suggested that HLC develop standards that are sufficiently concrete and specific to permit it to determine whether an institution is compliant or noncompliant; describe the Carnegie formula in written guidance and explicitly state that institutions should use this method or submit written justification of any deviation; and provide guidance on documenting deviations from the Carnegie method. HLC did not concur with our conclusions or our suggestions.
This is about as damning an indictment of an accreditation organization as one could imagine.
No specific standards. Hence no ability to compare institutional performance. And no ability to distinguish between compliant and noncompliant institutions.
Then (to borrow from Edwin Starr) what is it good for? Absolutely nothing!
This goes to the very root of the justification for accreditation in the first place. You need somebody to tell you what to do, the clones whine. You need big brother to wave his mighty hand and approve what you study and learn, and ultimately what you think. Now we are finding out the TRUTH, that accreditation agencies cannot distinguish between compliant and noncompliant, because there are no specific standards for comparing.
TESC = Harvard = St. Regis = UoPhoenix!! They are all the same in the eyes of the inept, incompetent, insubordinate accreditation agencies, because the accreditation agencies have no ability to tell them apart!
NCACS ignored the specific suggestions for improvement and thumbed it nose at the IG. They probably figured this notion of "standards" was something peculiar the Bush administration and would blow away in the winds of hope and change.
Surprise!
What if the Obamunist regime finally notices that their socialist pals in the higher ed cartel are being exposed as a public fraud and sham? Will somebody decide to "put their boot on the neck" of the IG, as Interior Secretary Ken Salazar so artfully put it?
Considering how well that's working out for Salazar it might not be much cause for concern. Let's hope the IG sticks to her guns and keeps pressing NCACS to begin doing it's job.
NCACS, either stand for something or stand aside. If you can't or won't do the job then quit pretending. "Unaccredited" has more value than "no standards sham accredited."