05-13-2007, 01:37 PM
OPM Operating Manual on Acceptability of Unaccredited Degrees
Here is a link to the portion of the US Office of Personnel Management's Operating Manual pertaining to the acceptability of unaccredited degrees:
http://www.opm.gov/qualifications/SEC-II/s2-e4.asp
The language is a bit convoluted in places, but overall this document shows that the feds take a very broad approach to determining what is an "accredited" degree, making no distinction between NA and RA.
Also, they make a fairly realistic evaluation of unaccredited programs. Generally if accredited schools are accepting the unaccredited coursework the work will be deemed equivalent of accredited as well by the feds. And even if it's not accepted, it still can be used for ranking purposes as long as it is not from a diploma mill.
Accredited--As a general rule all "accredited" schools are accepted as meeting minimum qualification requirements. The term "accredited" is defined broadly. It includes "the entire institution, applicable school within the institution, or the applicable curriculum if it was appropriately accredited by an accrediting body recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education."
Thus not just RA, but also NA and any accredited curriculum, presumably even in the rare event that the institution itself is not also accredited.
"Correspondence or distance learning course work is also acceptable if the applicable school within the institution or applicable curriculum is accredited by an accrediting body that is recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education."
Unaccredited--Non-accredited education may not be used to meet minimum education requirements, but still may be considered during the ranking process when evaluating qualified job applicants who already meet minimum qualification standards.
Most significantly, there also are exceptions which treat unaccredited courses as accredited if they are accepted for credit by accredited institutions. These exceptions include situations where "an accredited U.S. university or college reports the other institution as one whose transcript is given full value."
This in effect makes each accredited school an evaluator of unaccredited programs, at least as far as the feds are concerned.
Non-qualifying--This is unaccredited education that is not within the exceptions. This includes "diploma mills," but is not necessarily the equivalent thereof. "Diploma mills" are expressly forbidden from use in the ranking process, while "unaccredited" education is expressly allowed in the ranking process, so clearly they are not equivalent. They define "diploma mills" as those "granting degrees with few or no academic requirements."
So the bottom line seems to be four groups of institutions, with the distinctions between the groups gradually becoming more blurred as you proceed down the hierarchy.
1. Accredited--includes both RA and NA, as well as DoE approved program accreditation, such as e.g., PMI, even if the institution itself is neither RA or NA.
2. Unaccredited but accepted by accredited--treated as accredited
3. Non-Qualifying--unaccredited and not accepted by accredited
a. More than a few academic requirements--not accepted for minimum requirements but accepted for ranking
b. Diploma mill--few or no academic requirements--not accepted for minimum requirements or ranking
This document does make it fairly clear that (for federal employment purposes at least) any unaccredited degree that is not an outright "diploma mill" degree does indeed have some utility. Acceptance of such a degree by accredited schools increases that utility to the point that it is the functional equivalent of accredited.
Altogether this doesn't seem like such a bad deal. It gives no value to the clear fakes, but does give a value to the bona fide unaccredited schools commensurate with their value as perceived by accredited schools. It effectively lets the education community itself decide what is or is not equivalent of accredited, rather than some deviant bureaucrat. And it doesn't allow an unaccredited school to stand as the equivalent of an accredited one when it is not accepted by the accredited ones as such.
It's interesting to compare this system of evaluation with more oppressive and less thoughtful systems, such as we see in Oregon. The Oregon system is clearly substandard to that of the feds, in that it takes the approach that every unaccredited school is automatically a forbidden degree mill unless they jump through certain government hoops. In Oregon a bona fide unaccredited school that is accepted as such by accredited schools is treated exactly like a diploma mill. Clearly that is wrong, unfair, and serves no good purpose. All it does is limit competition and oppress the poor and working class people who most likely have the unaccredited degrees in the first place.
[Post courtesy of Degreeboard.com]
Here is a link to the portion of the US Office of Personnel Management's Operating Manual pertaining to the acceptability of unaccredited degrees:
http://www.opm.gov/qualifications/SEC-II/s2-e4.asp
The language is a bit convoluted in places, but overall this document shows that the feds take a very broad approach to determining what is an "accredited" degree, making no distinction between NA and RA.
Also, they make a fairly realistic evaluation of unaccredited programs. Generally if accredited schools are accepting the unaccredited coursework the work will be deemed equivalent of accredited as well by the feds. And even if it's not accepted, it still can be used for ranking purposes as long as it is not from a diploma mill.
Accredited--As a general rule all "accredited" schools are accepted as meeting minimum qualification requirements. The term "accredited" is defined broadly. It includes "the entire institution, applicable school within the institution, or the applicable curriculum if it was appropriately accredited by an accrediting body recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education."
Thus not just RA, but also NA and any accredited curriculum, presumably even in the rare event that the institution itself is not also accredited.
"Correspondence or distance learning course work is also acceptable if the applicable school within the institution or applicable curriculum is accredited by an accrediting body that is recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education."
Unaccredited--Non-accredited education may not be used to meet minimum education requirements, but still may be considered during the ranking process when evaluating qualified job applicants who already meet minimum qualification standards.
Most significantly, there also are exceptions which treat unaccredited courses as accredited if they are accepted for credit by accredited institutions. These exceptions include situations where "an accredited U.S. university or college reports the other institution as one whose transcript is given full value."
This in effect makes each accredited school an evaluator of unaccredited programs, at least as far as the feds are concerned.
Non-qualifying--This is unaccredited education that is not within the exceptions. This includes "diploma mills," but is not necessarily the equivalent thereof. "Diploma mills" are expressly forbidden from use in the ranking process, while "unaccredited" education is expressly allowed in the ranking process, so clearly they are not equivalent. They define "diploma mills" as those "granting degrees with few or no academic requirements."
So the bottom line seems to be four groups of institutions, with the distinctions between the groups gradually becoming more blurred as you proceed down the hierarchy.
1. Accredited--includes both RA and NA, as well as DoE approved program accreditation, such as e.g., PMI, even if the institution itself is neither RA or NA.
2. Unaccredited but accepted by accredited--treated as accredited
3. Non-Qualifying--unaccredited and not accepted by accredited
a. More than a few academic requirements--not accepted for minimum requirements but accepted for ranking
b. Diploma mill--few or no academic requirements--not accepted for minimum requirements or ranking
This document does make it fairly clear that (for federal employment purposes at least) any unaccredited degree that is not an outright "diploma mill" degree does indeed have some utility. Acceptance of such a degree by accredited schools increases that utility to the point that it is the functional equivalent of accredited.
Altogether this doesn't seem like such a bad deal. It gives no value to the clear fakes, but does give a value to the bona fide unaccredited schools commensurate with their value as perceived by accredited schools. It effectively lets the education community itself decide what is or is not equivalent of accredited, rather than some deviant bureaucrat. And it doesn't allow an unaccredited school to stand as the equivalent of an accredited one when it is not accepted by the accredited ones as such.
It's interesting to compare this system of evaluation with more oppressive and less thoughtful systems, such as we see in Oregon. The Oregon system is clearly substandard to that of the feds, in that it takes the approach that every unaccredited school is automatically a forbidden degree mill unless they jump through certain government hoops. In Oregon a bona fide unaccredited school that is accepted as such by accredited schools is treated exactly like a diploma mill. Clearly that is wrong, unfair, and serves no good purpose. All it does is limit competition and oppress the poor and working class people who most likely have the unaccredited degrees in the first place.
[Post courtesy of Degreeboard.com]
