Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jan 23, 2013, 11:52 AM   #1
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Central California schools now accredited after a lot of discrimination

Two military schools in my county, provisionally accredited for decades finally got the push from (likely former DoD secretary who long served as local member of Congress) to become full fledged schools where transfer credits count the same as a civilian high school, junior college, college, or graduate school.

Where you were allowed to say you had your AA, BA, BS, MS, MA, and PhD from these two institutions, now the rest of the education system in the Western Association of Schools and Colleges and five partner accrediting agencies have to see these two as full members, and with full rights and standing and not just a mere accreditation. They finally, in a sense, earned that third stripe.

This is a big thing and this year, the websites of those schools got the (.edu) designation most associated with accredited schools. Also I don't know if that amounts to a price break for the site or tax writeoffs but there's something in there financially that's good in running a school as a .edu entity versus anything else.

I remember meeting a friend from local career group who has his master's degree from the Naval Postgraduate School and he wanted to enroll in same studies at my civilian university, and I was puzzled. It seems just outside the county, many employers didn't consider a military school (other than the famous service academies) to hold the same level of prestige. While he knew and I knew his master's degree was as solid as any in the field, using the same texts and in my county the very same professors, he knew what he could face when he left the area after the navy. Back then, he spent another two years through the same classes and same professors getting that master's degree which would "count". This year, highly qualified graduates of the two local schools won't have to redo anything and their degree stands as legitimate and not some "military" training only.

Anyway, I put it here in these forums because whether it's said or not, there seems to be a lot of discrimination in all things military. Why is that and is it politically incorrect in circles I float around in (intellectuals, liberals, Green party members, etc)? When John Kerry said that not going to school will make it a possibility to get sent to Iraq in the battlefield, there seemed to be this notion that if you are dumb, you go to war. Even though he was Ivy League, he knew what he was doing when he went to the navy but saw that many, through lack of funds and lack of education, have almost nowhere to go but the battlefields of Vietnam where he saw them die. Why do some liberal elites think this way that the kids from trailer parks and ghettos "settle" for the military, military housing, military life, and military education? Are they being punished and where's there any talk about the luck of where you were born and to who?

While the department of education and regional accrediting agency has given their full blessing (and there are of course different levels of full blessing), they are real schools but now with real transfer units as any non-military school.

PS- I put up a rather recent thread on the deteriorating situation of service academies, and one a ways back about the decline of the VA, but that's a different topic not related to this thread.

Last edited by 63dot; Jan 23, 2013 at 12:03 PM.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 12:07 PM   #2
Rodimus Prime
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
When a place is not accredited what it means to employers is the degree does not exist and not worth the paper it is printed on. Even the US government will not considered a degree valid UNLESS it is accredited in terms of hiring and what not.

That the biggest thing. The thing military schools may be missing out on is some of the core requirements in the programs that they cut for the military stuff.
Rodimus Prime is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 12:44 PM   #3
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 63dot View Post
Two military schools in my county, provisionally accredited for decades finally got the push from (likely former DoD secretary who long served as local member of Congress) to become full fledged schools where transfer credits count the same as a civilian high school, junior college, college, or graduate school.
Which schools are you talking about? It isn't clear.

Quote:

PS- I put up a rather recent thread on the deteriorating situation of service academies, and one a ways back about the decline of the VA, but that's a different topic not related to this thread.
I think it may be related. There is a perception of military schools lacking the well-rounded aspect of what once was called a "liberal education". To the extent that these schools meet all the accreditation requirements, they should be considered to be equivalent, but, what was the hold-up about?
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 01:01 PM   #4
63dot
Thread Starter
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime View Post
When a place is not accredited what it means to employers is the degree does not exist and not worth the paper it is printed on. Even the US government will not considered a degree valid UNLESS it is accredited in terms of hiring and what not.

That the biggest thing. The thing military schools may be missing out on is some of the core requirements in the programs that they cut for the military stuff.
I will be devil's advocate here. Anyway let's say that required courses are cut for military courses (which is true of course), who cares? What if you at XOXO State U. took a course in US history and Women's studies and got 6 units of credit but Private Ryan took courses in Civil War history and the history of the US army's tactical divisions? How is that fundamentally different in that the regional accrediting agency gives a flying (you know what)? Is it somehow politically incorrect in the study of, well, how to be a better solider which will help you be more effective staying alive and if need be, killing the enemy? If those soldiers aren't out there risking their life for your freedom, you would be out there taking bullets.

On the other hand, I did know of an Army captain who got credit for advanced, graduate level mathematics by taking high school algebra. On one hand she saw this as a hoop on the way to graduation and possibly quicker promotion to major, but on the other hand she's the one out there in the first of Army women being very close to front lines risking her life. Personally, if the school does get it's promotion to fully accredited in every way, is it too hard to find people who receive master's degrees to at least hold the minimum requirements?

I have not been through this school but have met people who have graduated who feel proud where others with same degree feel like they were in some sort of racket. Teachers who don't pass students get fired a lot easier than the civilian teachers who are tough. Their job is not so much to teach and grade than to push soldiers through to make space for the next class. Officers come in, work up a certain way, get a master's degree in some cases, but usually leave educated and with retirement and are pretty much forgotten. It's likened by students to being a chicken factory, the school but more the military in general for those who have been there at least a decade or so.

I don't have the answers but to all those who study, teach, and administrate these two schools, it's a big plus to be a real school for a change. All schools have their shortcomings to be sure, but that's an everyday part of running such an organization.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post
Which schools are you talking about? It isn't clear.



I think it may be related. There is a perception of military schools lacking the well-rounded aspect of what once was called a "liberal education". To the extent that these schools meet all the accreditation requirements, they should be considered to be equivalent, but, what was the hold-up about?

First
, it really is about all military schools in general (many, many getting college unit transferability, finally) here and abroad but I was just talking about where I lived but this thread really applies to scores of military, government funded, schools.

Secondly, I don't know where, let's say funding for and grading something like a VA related Bethesda Naval Hospital or Walter Reed, has anything to do with schooling. Let's say, as many vets do, that those two hospitals were/are awful and it was some sort of failed socialism. That doesn't mean the schools are going to be the same, pork barrel, sub-par, inefficient entities.

You get political , tea party extremists like John Boehner calling everything socialism and pork barrel spending if it's something the democrats approve. It's weird how if the GOP came up with a program, then it's OK to spend and somehow that didn't contribute to the deficit.

What are we supposed to do? ... get rid of IRS and have all military be voluntary militia type entities with all medical being pushed over to private doctors and hospitals? Do we let all schools have to be charter schools and pretty much let college be something for those who have the cash? I could find a lot of problems with government funded hospitals, schools, buildings, etc but that doesn't mean we should call it all pork barrel and trash it in the name of cutting the deficit. Our founding fathers may have wanted limited government, but by no means did they mean no government/no government spending.

Last edited by 63dot; Jan 23, 2013 at 01:10 PM.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 01:45 PM   #5
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 63dot View Post
I will be devil's advocate here. Anyway let's say that required courses are cut for military courses (which is true of course), who cares? What if you at XOXO State U. took a course in US history and Women's studies and got 6 units of credit but Private Ryan took courses in Civil War history and the history of the US army's tactical divisions? How is that fundamentally different in that the regional accrediting agency gives a flying (you know what)? Is it somehow politically incorrect in the study of, well, how to be a better solider which will help you be more effective staying alive and if need be, killing the enemy? If those soldiers aren't out there risking their life for your freedom, you would be out there taking bullets.

On the other hand, I did know of an Army captain who got credit for advanced, graduate level mathematics by taking high school algebra. On one hand she saw this as a hoop on the way to graduation and possibly quicker promotion to major, but on the other hand she's the one out there in the first of Army women being very close to front lines risking her life. Personally, if the school does get it's promotion to fully accredited in every way, is it too hard to find people who receive master's degrees to at least hold the minimum requirements?

I have not been through this school but have met people who have graduated who feel proud where others with same degree feel like they were in some sort of racket. Teachers who don't pass students get fired a lot easier than the civilian teachers who are tough. Their job is not so much to teach and grade than to push soldiers through to make space for the next class. Officers come in, work up a certain way, get a master's degree in some cases, but usually leave educated and with retirement and are pretty much forgotten. It's likened by students to being a chicken factory, the school but more the military in general for those who have been there at least a decade or so.

I don't have the answers but to all those who study, teach, and administrate these two schools, it's a big plus to be a real school for a change. All schools have their shortcomings to be sure, but that's an everyday part of running such an organization.

----------



First
, it really is about all military schools in general (many, many getting college unit transferability, finally) here and abroad but I was just talking about where I lived but this thread really applies to scores of military, government funded, schools.
Well, it helps me to have examples to understand what we are talking about. I assume, based on this, that you may be talking about schools like DLI and NPS?

http://www.montereyherald.com/local/...ion-reaffirmed

As far as I know, a school just has to ask a specific accreditation agency for accreditation. I don't think it really matters if it is a military school or not. Perhaps in the post-WWII era, public familiarity with these institutions was great enough that they felt they didn't need accreditation, which costs time and money.

The problem with DLI is that it has a very limited scope. Teaching soldiers how to understand intercepted transmissions that say things like "attack on the left" in Arabic, or whatever. Certainly, DLI has taught a large number of languages to a large number of people, but, I'm not sure how graduates get "credit" for speaking Urdu other than being able to write it down somewhere it asked what languages you speak.

NPS, by its nature, should have programs that map perfectly well in certain areas (e.g. business), but, somebody has to make the effort to get the accreditation. I guess what I am asking is, were these schools discriminated against in getting accreditation? Did the schools jump through the hoops? I can easily guess that the budget to support accreditation is the first thing cut when budgets take a downturn.


Quote:
Secondly, I don't know where, let's say funding for and grading something like a VA related Bethesda Naval Hospital or Walter Reed, has anything to do with schooling. Let's say, as many vets do, that those two hospitals were/are awful and it was some sort of failed socialism. That doesn't mean the schools are going to be the same, pork barrel, sub-par, inefficient entities.
I was never in these hospitals (I drove past) so I can't say how efficient/inefficient they were/are. Lots of private hospitals are inefficient, too. Is this a healthcare discussion? I'm confused.

Quote:
You get political , tea party extremists like John Boehner calling everything socialism and pork barrel spending if it's something the democrats approve. It's weird how if the GOP came up with a program, then it's OK to spend and somehow that didn't contribute to the deficit.

What are we supposed to do? ... get rid of IRS and have all military be voluntary militia type entities with all medical being pushed over to private doctors and hospitals? Do we let all schools have to be charter schools and pretty much let college be something for those who have the cash? I could find a lot of problems with government funded hospitals, schools, buildings, etc but that doesn't mean we should call it all pork barrel and trash it in the name of cutting the deficit. Our founding fathers may have wanted limited government, but by no means did they mean no government/no government spending.
The founding fathers saw a mixture of "socialism" and "private enterprise". My own opinion is that it is better not to mix them, as we do with Medicare, for example, since publicly-funded private enterprise has been demonstrated to be the most costly way to go.

But, I'm not sure how this relates to the accreditation of military schools?!
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 03:16 PM   #6
63dot
Thread Starter
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post

But, I'm not sure how this relates to the accreditation of military schools?!
I think because accreditation costs money, taxpayers money, it all becomes an major issue in the government's budget.

You are right in saying that now there's going to be a downturn in the budget of DoD, and probably everything else, so things like civilian accreditation for a military school will take a back seat. Thanks for bringing that up as it all dovetails neatly into discussions we will have in upcoming fights over the budget.

This whole issue, and many other issues concerning government spending, will be the main thing in the news for the next few months.

The conservative isolationists of the GOP have never had a big voice but this time, with the help of the Tea Party members in the GOP, funding for the DoD will drop drastically. We can't currently survive in an isolationist state, as much as my Tea Party friends claim, and cutting back on DoD will have to be gradual, not extreme.

What I am waiting for is one of my many friends who are libertarians who I invited here to chime in.

On the bigger scope beyond this thread I ask:

1) Is it important for military schools to seek expensive civilian accreditation?
2) Is it even important for the military to have stand alone schools here and abroad?
3) And I know this will come up, is it important for us to even have any military presence abroad or should we solely rely on local militias, held up by 2nd amendment, to be the core of our nation's defense?

Last edited by 63dot; Jan 23, 2013 at 03:21 PM.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2013, 03:29 PM   #7
63dot
Thread Starter
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post
Which schools are you talking about? It isn't clear.
I forgot, sorry Defense Language Institute/FLIC (foreign languages) and Naval Postgraduate School (mostly technical MS degree programs), but this thread really relates to many, if not all non-service academy military schools.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2013, 03:42 PM   #8
63dot
Thread Starter
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
I just got a recent issue of a army/civilian job transition magazine yesterday and it may be the last issue where actual civilian universities have to point out that they will accept military college units, too thus making them military-friendly.

That's one good thing about the move by Panetta to legitimize military training units into real college credits because a lot of soldiers will leave the army, go to college, and work for the rest of their lives out of uniform and why not let some of that college level training count in real, fully regionally accredited college units? Sure, employers may still hand onto old prejudices and take an applicant with a "State U" or tawny "Private U" degree over one who went to a "war college" but no longer will the military school be considered sub-standard.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I am a victim of discrimination jkcerda Wasteland 4 May 3, 2014 10:05 PM
Conservatives Fear Discrimination iBlazed Politics, Religion, Social Issues 61 Mar 28, 2014 02:22 PM
Need an Accredited Online Course on Programming Languages ArtOfWarfare Mac Programming 6 Sep 9, 2013 11:30 AM
Applying to schools and trying to move to California , help! likemyorbs Community Discussion 14 Sep 4, 2012 05:31 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC