Talk:List of unaccredited institutions of higher education

Andersonville Seminary

I keep seeing some one add the ACIS "recognized" info on all entries about this "school" yet I can never find anything other than a link to their own website. What do you guys think? --Super--

Institutions who now has accreditation and needs to be removed

This list needs to be updated and the schools mentioned below needs to be removed

American College of Commerce and Technology http://www.acics.org/councilactions.aspx April 2015 page 2 AriaEss (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)02/02/2016

Akamai University accredited by International Accrediting Body-http://www.asicuk.com/international-directory/Accreditation Service for International Colleges see Chea's international accreditor--》 http://cheainternational.org/intdb/display1.asp?ID=c164

Atlantic International University accredited by International Accrediting Body-http://www.asicuk.com/international-directory/Accreditation Service for International Colleges see Chea's international accreditor--》 http://cheainternational.org/intdb/display1.asp?ID=c164

Delta International University of New Orleans accredited by International Accrediting Body-http://www.asicuk.com/international-directory/Accreditation Service for International Colleges see Chea's international accreditor--》 http://cheainternational.org/intdb/display1.asp?ID=c164 2605:E000:6009:9700:C03B:642B:A7BB:5228 (talk) 04:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Done Verified source given and ASIC is listed as a recognized accreditor in the international directory of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation's. Source verified LRappaport (talk) 04:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

ASIC doesn't cut it. They stay. Scr★pIron^IV 14:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

While I agree with ScrapIronIV that "ASIC [alone] doesn't cut it," I feel obligated to point out to passers-by that whether "ASIC cuts it" is a matter of dispute. There are discussions on this talk page, on Talk:Diploma mill, and in related places linked to from the above locations. These discussions have not had as much input as we would like and the dispute deserves wider participation. Editors reading this more than a couple of months from now should consider re-starting the discussion if the discussion hasn't picked up in the meantime. The best outcome would be to get enough participants, especially enough who are regular contributors in University articles but also some editors who don't follow University subjects and also some new editors, to have a healthy discussion on this issue. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:31, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

I was involved in a long AfD for an unaccredited "university" that this SPA IP was seeing to keep because of ASIC. Fortunately, common sense prevailed. - Multiple other SPA's and socks piled on - this seriously needs to be handled long term, and not have to peck it out every few weeks that this "organization" wants to recognize its "schools." Scr★pIron^IV 21:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment- Hello Wikipedia, I'm new to your website and came across this talk page. This guy "ScrapIronIV" is funny. That's all you have to say? ASIC doesn't cut it? "this "organization" wants to recognize its "schools?" This does not sound Neutral and sounds a little Wikipedia:Systemic bias. What are your real reasons why it should stay? You have not given any ideas. All you have done is make short statements. Instead of bashing, try and find a resolution my friend. Have you taken the time to actually read through all of the talk pages etc.. I really don’t think so based on your short quick responses.

There are several reasons why this article should be re-worked and some institutions should be removed. This article is a mess and very misleading. The article should Read “List of Unaccredited Institutions Not Accredited by a US Agency” than reference each school with their accreditation agency and their country (e.g., Atlantic International University, Accredited by Accreditation Service for International Colleges, a Council for Higher Education Accreditation International Quality Group accreditor based in the UK. [this] proves it and it's constantly disregarded and overlooked due to bias. See List of recognized higher education accreditation organizations

Please see an email from a Council for Higher Education Accreditation representative that sheds a little light on NON-US Accreditation. See thisHe states that there is no Law governing that a Degree from an “ASIC” institution would or would not be accepted. Based on this information “ASIC” is a recognized organization outside of the US. It could be a number of reasons as to why an institution based in the US would gain accreditation through an agency outside of the US, but it’s not breaking any Law. My guess would be because a number of their students could live outside of the US? That is not for us to judge and make false statements as to this institution and accrediting agency. Please remember that accreditation is “Voluntary” and not a requirement, so the fact that these institutions gained accreditation through a NON-US accreditor should not be taken lightly or overlooked in any form. The subject matter is “ACCREDITATION” which this institution has. ASIC appears to have a pretty rigorous process, see this & this This article does not have a definable set of contents. Neither "institution of higher learning" nor "accreditation" is adequately defined; it is therefore impossible to determine whether an institution is a potential member of the list or not. Inclusion criteria on the list itself include an unacceptable self reference to WP:RS. "Accreditation" is a term of art within the context of U.S. higher education, and not a neutral, verifiable quality. This list is inherently un-encyclopedic. A majority of the list's members are non-notable. Other points below that explain issues in this article.

1). Article is too confusing and misleading. 2). Arbitrary Sampling 3). Article’s title should read “List Of Institutions Not Accredited in the United States” 4). There is hardly any Original Research 5.) An article should be created for each school on here and list their accreditation agencies as references, possible in the beginning of the article make a mention that some schools on this list are accredited but by Agencies Outside of the United States. 5.) Per WP:NOT#DIR and the need for constant maintenance. It is also vastly incomplete

I say either delete this article and recreate or re-work the title and references as well introduction of the article so this can be more clear and understandable Smooth Lawyer (talk) 04:01, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

An institution located in the US not seeking accreditation from a US accreditation body, but instead going to some accreditation body outside the US which doesn't have any value in the US is rather suspicious. This raises all kinds of red flags. And the institution on its own website says that they are not accredited, even though they managed to get some paper from a foreign accreditation agency. This simply doesn't pass the smell test. Further, it is not clear if that accreditation agency in the UK can actually accredit institutions outside of its jurisdiction. So, I agree with ScrapIronIV that "ASIC doesn't cut it." jfeise (talk) 07:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi jfeise please see this document that the US Council for Higher Education Accreditation has posted on their own website. This may answer your concern as to NON US accreditation Smooth Lawyer (talk) 23:38, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

That document doesn't even apply here, because this is not about cross-border higher education. A US-based institution would have to get a US accreditation. This institution doesn't have that and states on heir own website that they are not accredited: "ATLANTIC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY IS NOT ACCREDITED BY AN ACCREDITING AGENCY RECOGNIZED BY THE UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF EDUCATION." So, it continues to be the case that their ASIC "accreditation" doesn't cut it. jfeise (talk) 00:17, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi jfeise, maybe we got off on the wrong foot, so let me explain what I'm trying to say. The document was in reference to your statement "Further, it is not clear if that accreditation agency in the UK can actually accredit institutions outside of its jurisdiction." How is it that a US accrediting agency can accredit a School outside of the US Jurisdiction? Is the UK inferior to the US? It seems that the what is being said. All I'm saying is that this article needs to be re-worked. The institution can remain on this list, but the title and introduction is inaccurate. Yes this institution does not have "US Accreditation" but they do have accreditation. The article's title is List of unaccredited institutions of higher education where it's kind of confusing. Some of these institutions have accreditation outside of the US that is recognized by their government. So to say that institutions on this list does not have "ANY" accreditation is inaccurate and not properly sourced. I really don't want to get into a battle match with editors on wikipedia. That's not why I am here. I've argued for over 30 years, hence the reason I am now retired. The idea is to make since of this article and for an article to hold weight and to be considered a reliable source, it should be accurate for the readers. Let's please be a little more level headed. Yes, they are not accredited by a "US" accrediting agency as you have already established that, but they do have accreditation by a Recognized "NON-US" organization who CHEA has listed on their own website as a NON-US "Recognized" accreditation agency in which this has been established here-->http://cheainternational.org/intdb/display1.asp?ID=c164 and approved by their government, the Home Office, see this and this. Your statement "A US-based institution would have to get a US accreditation" is objectionable as there is NO such source or law that governs that statement. It has been established that a US based institution that would seek NON-US accreditation appears to have a red flag. That's our own personal opinion and personal thoughts. We need to state facts here. So instead of going back and forth about this, let's come to some type of Neutral ground and resolution. Wouldn't it be ideal to title the article "List of Institutions Not Accredited in the US?" Is this an unreasonable request? I'm just trying to get clarity as to this article and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Let's not argue, but find some sort of resolution. We are all adults here and we will have our own opinions, but let's be level headed about this situation and try to remedy some of the articles issues. That's all I'm saying Smooth Lawyer (talk) 04:53, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

No, the article doesn't need to get re-worded. That institution doesn't have any accreditation recognized in the jurisdiction that institution is in. That institution acknowledges that itself. They admit that they don't have an accreditation recognized by the United States. That's all we need to know. Anything else is just a smoke screen. Instead of tring to defend the indefensible on Wikipedia, why don't you initiate the accreditation process of that institution with a recognized US accreditation agency? You obviously have a vested interest in that institution being acknowledged as accredited, so the obvious way is to get accreditation from a recognized US accreditation agency. Problem solved. Until then, they need to stay on this list. jfeise (talk) 07:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi jfeise, please don’t make false accusations as to me being vested in this organization. That is a COP-OUT coward act. I’m just stating facts and your statements are simply personal biased opinions. Apparently you have a past history as to the Accreditation Service for International Colleges based on your User talk:Jfeise page in which you argued with Orientalsoul, Doug Weller, User:207.204.229.209, User:A8v and many others about this same issue and seem to have some type vendetta against NON-US organizations. Other countries aren’t inferior to the US. I’m sorry but you really should check yourself and check your statements. It definitely shows in tone that you have some personal feelings when I was simply trying to state facts and be cordial and not engage in a argument. I’m done. Enjoy your day! Smooth Lawyer (talk) 16:08, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

LOL. You are an SPA, you haven't posted about anything else. That clearly indicates that you have a vested interest in this particular institution. I have wide-ranging interests. You haven't stated any relevant facts, but you seem to have time to go through past things from my talk page, which you grossly misrepresent. Anyway, the institution you so clearly have a vested interest in says on their website that they are not accredited. Ergo, the institution belongs on this list. It really is *that* simple. jfeise (talk) 18:46, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

jfeise, Little girl or little boy or whoever you are. Why are you still talking? Stop puffy your chest out over the internet. It's not necessary and it's not that serious. Relax! I said in my last post that I was over this. Your User talk:Jfeise talk page says it all so there is no need to go on about this issue my friend. Apparently you have it out for certain organizations. Again, stop with your false accusations please. It shows when someone hits a nerve, you react, by attacking people and using COI and SPA as a defense. That's a COP-OUT as I said before. For the record, I just signed up to Wikipedia and plan to make edits to other articles (Law, Politics and Education) predominately. I haven't found an article as of yet, but when I do you will be the first to know so you can go and revert my edits, lol.. I will pray for you. Take care Smooth Lawyer (talk) 19:09, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Really, a personal attack? How lame. That makes clear that you aren't a lawyer at all. jfeise (talk) 19:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Note that this isn't the firs SPA "lawyer" who happened across one of the "schools" represented by this "accrediting body" to post a wall of text. Fascinating how that just keeps happening. You should have seen the last AfD. [1] Scr★pIron^IV 14:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

FYI, we now have evidence that Smooth Lawyer indeed has a WP:COI. He posted with an IP address and soon after changed the signature once he had logged in: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EdJohnston&diff=next&oldid=690344361 There are a couple of edits from that IP address, pretty much all related to AIU, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/38.119.54.108 So, he wasn't quite "new to your website and came across this talk page" after all. Fascinating, indeed. jfeise (talk) 00:13, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

* Comment Wow, there is a lot of Bias, Favoritism, Bigotry happening on this talk page. It's funny how US accreditation bodies can accredited schools outside of the US, but Wikipedia editors have issues with NON-US accreditation bodies accrediting US institutions. Isn't that a double standard? It looks like the US accredits a list of NON US Schools without any issues http://www.al-fanarmedia.org/2015/05/internationally-accredited-schools-and-institutions/ Why is it a problem that a NON-Us recognized accreditation body would accredit a US based University? It reads as if other countries are subordinate to the US. This is an unfair practice and it makes us appear that we are prejudice to anything that is NON-American. It does not look good at all. We should really look at this issue as it appears to be an ongoing problem. As an outsider looking in, it really looks bad 2605:E000:6009:9700:785C:BE62:FACB:918 (talk) 05:11, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment Wow, there are a lot of SPA accounts desperate to get their Diploma Mills some semblance of credibility on this talk page. Scr★pIron^IV 14:32, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment To put it simply, where the law of the land states that only nationally recognized accreditation matters, US accreditation is irrelevant. There were instances wherein national educational institutions taught and offered diplomas in the name of a US college, see e.g. Bard College Berlin (prior to having received German accreditation; it now has double accreditation, both US and German). The Dutch call it "U-bocht construction"; in the Netherlands unaccredited colleges are allowed to teach, but the state does not recognize their degrees (if foreign degrees get granted, they are judged by the Dutch authorities according the law of that particular country). Some countries require all universities to teach only if they have accreditation or temporary authorization from the national accrediting body (e.g. Romania since the study year 2011-2012; a government pardon has been issued to prior studies). Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:18, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

• Regarding non-US-based schools seeking US accreditation (2605:E000:6009:9700:785C:BE62:FACB:918's edit of 05:11, 11 November 2015 (UTC)): There are several reasons why a legitimate school would seek accreditation from a reputable US-based agency: 1) The home country doesn't have any meaningful accreditation system in place, 2) the school caters to students who will move to America after graduation, 3) it is seeking a type of accreditation, such as "program accreditation", which is not offered in its home country, or 4) the school is fully accredited and recognized as a legitimate institution in its home country but it is seeking to boost its reputation internationally. Reasons 2-4 may also apply to legitimate US schools that already have recognized regional accreditation. In any of these cases - whether it's a non-US school seeking US accreditation or a US school seeking non-US accreditation, the first question that needs to be asked is "do employers and graduate schools in that school's country consider the degrees legitimate?" That's not always the only question that determines if a school is "legitimate" or not, but if the answer is "no" then the school is presumed to be "not a legitimate school." Having said that, there are legitimate schools that choose to not be accredited. Yes, I realize the title of this article is List of unaccredited institutions of higher education and not Diploma mill, but since the de facto definition of meaningful accreditation is one that comes with the respect from employers and graduate schools, and the de facto definition of meaningless accreditation is one that does not come with such respect, I think it's appropriate to make these comments on this talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 05:39, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• Comment Good points, the only problem is that we wouldn't know the answer if employers and graduate schools in that school's country consider the degrees legitimate. That's a question that could not be answered unless someone who has a degree from any of these organizations state that they were not hired, or their degree was not accepted into a graduate school because of "unaccredited status." In this situation, a person holding a degree from an unaccredited university would have to contact the school they are looking to enter as a graduate, or ask the employer if their degree would be acceptable. I do know some schools will accept an unaccredited degree based on certain criteria's (Entry Exam or an in-depth evaluation and determination that the school and its academic programs meet standards required by law). Note that graduate schools accept transfer credits and or undergraduate students solely at their own discretion. All schools and employers have their own criteria. Just like you said "There are several reasons why a legitimate school would seek accreditation from a reputable US-based agency", but there are several reasons why legitimate schools in the US would seek a reputable Non-US Based agency. Here's some information that some schools do and some don't accept NON-Accredited degrees. Here's a Transfer-of-Credit Survey that Emmanuel Lutheran College a (Non-Accredited School) took to see what colleges would accept their unaccredited degrees-->http://www.ilc.edu/academics/pdf/toc_survey.pdf This supports my point when I say that schools have their own criteria's.

Furthermore, I would guess that an employer or school would accept an institution who has recognizable NON-US accreditation as oppose to any accreditation. This shows that an institution actually went through some type of process to gain accreditation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:6009:9700:858B:39CE:87D7:BE1D (talk) 06:44, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

References

European Graduate School

Why European Graduate School is in that list? I was seeking for clarification about EGS inclusion in a list of no accredited school and I have just received an Official Letter from State of Maine Department of Education. Their official statement, signed by A.M.L. Higher Education Specialist http://www.maine.gov/doe/highered/, states that "the Maine Department of Education does not mantain the list of unaccredited postsecondary institutions. That list belongs to and mantain by Wikipedia We only link to it".http://maine.gov/doe/highered/nonaccredited/index.html. It is my understanding that a definition of Accredited or not Accredited Diploma should have be made based on official Certification and not on Wikipedia information. However, I note that European Graduate School has been accredited as a University in Malta on February 2016http://ncfhe.gov.mt/en/register/Pages/list_universities.aspx, so this list should be updated by taking off the EGS as they received a recent University status by an Sovereign and European Country (in Europe Bologna process applies). thanks. Claudioalv (talk) 15:15, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Done Per the source mentioned above, EGS has been removed from the list LRappaport (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

PLEASE EDIT... - the European Graduate School is still listed, despite the entry above (11 April 2016) saying that it has been removed. I see no green check mark at the bottom of this section - perhaps a final step was accidentally overlooked?

The European Graduate School is accredited by the National Commission for Further and Higher Education (NCFHE) of the EU nation of Malta. "European Graduate School, location of Fort St Elmo, Valletta, License #​2015-007, and Duration of License February 2016 - February 2021 is clearly stated on the second line under "Univ​ersities (offering​ co​urses from MQF Level 5 - MQF Level 8)​" For next citation, after clicking link, click blue box on right "See List of Accredited Courses offered by Licensed Institutions" in right blue box link to download Excel Spreadsheet. See the Excel Spreadsheet which opens on lines #405-412 for the accredited courses at the MA and PhD levels, which are clearly stated.

Additionally, the National Commission for Further and Higher Education (NCFHE) of Malta is recognized by the Council of Higher Education Accreditation of the United States formally as their Quality Assurance Body international partner agency.

Thanks, apk 87.162.74.84 (talk) 18:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

The article about the institution, here: [2] says it is not accredited.

There seems to be significant advocacy going on at the talk page [3]. Other than this particular IP, everybody else seems to agree that this institution is not accredited. jfeise (talk) 19:56, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

This is a friendly correction, which has already been marked "Done" by an editor above, who appears to have accidentally forgotten a final step. EGS is newly accredited in February 2016. This is why a few websites are in process of removing them from their non-accredited list. Providing new information to correct out-of-date (and thus now false information) is not the same thing as advocacy. Here are the primary source citations: "The European Graduate School is accredited to offer the MA and PhD degrees through the National Commission for Further and Higher Education (NCFHE) of the European Union member nation of Malta." The European Graduate School, location of Fort St Elmo, Valletta, License #​2015-007, and Duration of License February 2016 - February 2021 is clearly stated on the second line under "Univ​ersities (offering​ co​urses from MQF Level 5 - MQF Level 8)​" Click blue box on right "See List of Accredited Courses offered by Licensed Institutions" in right blue box link to download Excel Spreadsheet. See the Excel Spreadsheet which opens on lines #405-412 for the accredited courses at the MA and PhD levels, which are clearly stated. Thanks very much, apk.87.162.74.84 (talk) 22:13, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 April 2016

PLEASE ADD: Faith School of Theology (Charleston, Maine; claims accreditation with the International Association of Bible Colleges and Seminaries, not a recognized accreditor)

References

104.160.221.26 (talk) 01:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done Daniel Kenneth (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2016

Atlantic International University update request

Can someone please add this note to this institution? This institution is accredited by the United Kingdom ASIC Accreditation Service for International Colleges[4] , an accreditation agency listed in the US Council for Higher Education Accreditation's international directory[5][6][7]. However, this institution is not accredited by an agency recognized by the US DOE [8]

I noticed other institutions have notes as to their non-accredited status. Thanks

2605:E000:6009:9700:F97B:3165:87A7:7D1 (talk) 04:50, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Done Most of the refs you gave don't mention the university in question. I picked one of the refs that looked relevant. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 07:06, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

it looks like your edit was reverted by another user for unknown reasons. Please review.  Andy W. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:6009:9700:9C85:7B05:F36F:E028 (talk) 01:40, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Replied on my talk after post. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 01:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 June 2016

CASTLEBRIDGE UNIVERSITY (HAWAII) FAKE UNIVERSITY (1998) GOOGLE CASTLEBRIDGE University. Was opened then closed when 4 people received their DR's of Psychology. They Mothballed the Site to avoid anyone else applying for a fake degree. They wanted to keep it small so it would be harder to find and there would be alimited number of graduates 4.

174.95.188.52 (talk) 12:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)