PEARLS OF WISDOM FROM JACK THE RIPPER

[DR ANATIDAE]

From DD's discussion on RA or NO WAY:

"With all due respect to Jonathan, he has asked the wrong question. The entire "RA or no-way" campaign was designed by certain undesirable elements to try to portray the promotion of legitimate schools/degrees as an extremist position. There was never any real opposition to NA or GAAP degrees. In fact, many of the members of these DL boards have long promoted such degrees, myself included. In some cases, the debate has not even been about accredited v. unaccredited schools as there have been some well regarded unaccredited schools that have been mentioned time and time again. Over the years we have seen some of these unaccredited schools move into the realm of accreditation and these moves have been universally celebrated.

The problem has been that these undesirable elements have sought to equate their degree mill "degrees" with NA or GAAP degrees. Like a stupid kid on a skateboard they have sought to latch onto a bus/car/truck and be pulled effortlessly into legitimacy. Dividing the world of education into two parts [RA (legitimate) and no-way (illegitimate)] is a non-starter. The key is specificity. Let's look at each school as a separate entity. We know that not all RA schools are the same. This is true of DETC schools, GAAP schools and unaccredited schools as well. A survey about RA or no-way needs to be more specific before it becomes useful."

[Little Arminius]

From DD's discussion on RA or NO WAY:

Jack:

With all due respect to Jonathan, he has asked the wrong question. The entire "RA or no-way" campaign was designed by certain undesirable elements to try to portray the promotion of legitimate schools/degrees as an extremist position. There was never any real opposition to NA or GAAP degrees. In fact, many of the members of these DL boards have long promoted such degrees, myself included...

Talk about revisionist history! I guess that the "certain undesireable elements" refers to DLTruth and its predecessor, Jamesville. That really takes a set of balls on Jack's part, when you consider that DI is run by a porno peddling weirdo and that DD's owner, Gus Sainz, is presently involved in a number of legal disputes. To the best of my knowledge none of our members have such a background, let alone the proprietor. I'll address the substance of his comments at a later time.

[Phineas Fogg]

These bipeds don't know what they're talking about. There is no such thing as "GAAP degrees".

[Little Arminius]

"GAAP degrees" is Bear-speak, a term that J.B. used and Mariah Bear continues to use in the most recent edition (16th ???) of Bear's Guide. I didn't buy the 16th edition (but did buy about 8 earlier editions). However, I did read the copy at the public library on several occasions. If no one else can quote the section on GAAP degrees, I'll check the library copy and report back.

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say that neither Dennis nor James bought a 16th edition but Neil, being the gentleman that he is, probably did.

[Herbert Spencer]

"GAAP degrees" is Bear-speak

Here is what it says in Bear's 15th edition:

What is GAAP?

Any school can claim that it is accredited; the use of that word is not regulated in any way by most states.  This chapter (and all the school listing chapters that make up the bulk of this book) distinguishes between those accrediting agencies that are recognized under GAAP, Generally Accepted Accrediting Principles, and those that are not.  It's important to recognize that no one in particular "determines" what GAAP is; by definition, it is the policies that are generally accepted and followed by a large majority of the relevant key decision-makers—university registrars and admissions officers, corporate human resources officer, and government agencies—that form the basis of these principles.  Because there's no official body to determine what GAAP is, it is also a somewhat "moving target."  In the last edition of this book, we reported that the inclusion of a school in the International Handbook of Universities was a criteria that most college registrars would accept as evidence of the acceptability and legitimacy of a degree.  However, our recent survey of registrars indicates that this is no longer the case.  Therefore, we've updated the GAAP criteria, for this edition (by removing listing in the International Handbook as a criterion) to more accurately reflect what the key decision-makers are now doing.  And, as diploma mills get more and more crafty, such as by locating in an obscure, developing country where the right contacts can yield "government approval," the registrars and others who collectively define the criteria will undoubtedly continue to alter GAAP criteria to continue to ensure that their standards are being upheld.

Note that in some countries, the word accredited is not used, although that country's evaluation process (e.g., the British Royal Charter) is accepted as "accredited" under GAAP.  Note too that accreditors that do not meet the standards of GAAP are not necessarily bad, illegal, or fake.  They simply would not be generally accepted as recognized accreditors.  

GAAP Criteria

To offer recognized accreditation under GAAP, an accrediting agency must meet at least one of the following four criteria:

• For schools based in the U.S., there is no disagreement: accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized either by the U.S. Department of Education, and/or by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation.

• For schools in Great Britain and the British Commonwealth, it is membership in the Association of Commonwealth Universities and a listing in the Commonwealth Universities Yearbook.

• For schools in Australia, it is recognition by the Australian Qualifications Framework.

• For schools in other countries, it is an appropriate description in the World Education Series (published by PIER, Projects In International Education Research, a joint venture of AACRAO, NAFSA (the Association of International Educators) with the participation of the College Board; or a listing in the Countries Series, published by NOOSR, the Australian National Office for Overseas Skills Recognition.

http://books.google.com/books?id=k67XC_7...CmOd968zn0

[Herbert Spencer]

In fact, many of the members of these DL boards have long promoted such degrees, myself included.

Jack the Kipper was just one of the many bleating sheep waxing ecstatic over the Collins Circus in Congress, where CCU was labeled a "diploma mill," just weeks before it was accredited.  

No question that now the NA schools are being recognized as legitimate and economical alternatives to the RA cartel, the sheep have to jump on board the bandwagon or risk being kicked further to the curb.  I just wish they would admit they were wrong in the first place, rather than lie about "long promoting" such degrees.

[ham]

For schools in Great Britain and the British Commonwealth, it is membership in the Association of Commonwealth Universities and a listing in the Commonwealth Universities Yearbook.

It seems "honest John" the used car salesman forgets royal charters and parliament bills.
I never used any "guide book" to assess the credibility of a school: i phoned relevant government bodies (UK has a ministry of education...does "honest John" know? ).
The USA system is a minority.
Most other countries, from Canada to Germany to France, depend on public/state licensure.
What an expert...

[Phineas Fogg]

G A A P = Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Bear fosters his accrediting notion by hijacking a commonly used and understood acronym for his own purposes. Seems to be a common millist trick... naming your interests, concepts, or fraudulent school the same as a recognized one.