National vs Regional Accredited school

A buddy of mine asked me if it really made a difference in his job hunt if he did his BS in Computer Science from a nationally accredited school from Grantham University. I answered with a shrug. Haven't heard of the school but the program doesn't look bad. Only thing I could think of is that it can't transfer to another regionally school which leads to not being able to start a MS somewhere. I'm under the impression Regional is always the way to always go. Besides those issues do employers really care if its Nationally or Regionally accredited?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

ptilsen

Regional accreditation is a huge deal. Non-regionally accredited schools be definition are no respected by employers, and generally lack strong academic standards. It's not that all employers even necessarily understand this concept, it's that they will have little respect for a degree from a non-regionally accredited school because the school will either have (again, by definition) no reputation or a bad reputation.

Note I say "non-regionally accredited" because national and regional accreditation are not mutually exclusive. Transferring specific industry or trade credits even between regionally accredited schools will sometimes involve national accreditation. However, in general any regionally accredited school should considered sufficiently accredited for transfer purposes and employment purposes.

My very strong (and, unfortunately, experienced) opinion on the matter is that non-regionally accredited schools, with virtually no exception, are essentially worthless and should pretty much never be considered.

charlemagne

As someone that has been an actual faculty member at a regionally accredited university and (grudgingly) participated in various committees in preparation for the on-site visit from representatives of the accrediting body (I like my privacy otherwise I'd specify which one) and, for a CS degree or any degree, spend your money at a regionally accredited institution. As ptilsen said, it's a huge deal. If you wanted to be a lawyer, for example, would you pay to attend a non-ABA accredited law school? Not if you want a job. Because being ABA accredited means everything for those going into law.
Anyway, there are so many institutions of higher education that are regionally accredited why would one choose not to attend one of them? If you ever want to transfer credit or attend graduate school, then having a degree (or course work) from a regionally accredited school is a must. Employers, more often than not, have a vague idea of a regionally accredited CS degree vs a non-accredited degree.
You can simply do your own research using GOOGLE and since it's going to cost money anyway: Regionally accredited universities/colleges are your best choice.
There are statistics available on any school that is accredited. Check out the Dept. of Education or just peruse the Chronicle of Higher Education.

CISPhD

Another opinion from a hiring manager here... School accreditation isn't too big of a deal within most private organizations such as manufacturing, engineering, or professional services. Unless you're trying to get a job at a government institution such as an agency, university, or the like, you generally wont see employers (particularly in IT) research whether your degree is regionally accreditation or not.

Speaking to myself personally, I actually do check these things... but only because I am well versed in the accreditation system. Most managers, however, are completely ignorant to the difference between regional and national accreditation. So long as the degree is complete, and the school isn't known to be a degree mill (University of Phoenix), I don't think there will be many issues.

On a side note, and stemming from ptilsen's comment... National accreditation is not necessarily worse than regional accreditation. They are two entirely separate accreditation bodies. That's the equivalent of saying technical degrees aren't as good as management degrees.... While management degrees have a broader use, they are on a completely different track than technical degrees. Each have their own merits, and each has a different focus. National accreditation get a poor rap because most schools that are well known (Ivy League) don't really bother with national accreditation.

TL;DR: Most private sector employers don't care so long as the degree is complete. Unless you are interviewing with someone who understands accreditation, it shouldn't be an issue. They rely more on your experience and certs, than on the accreditation level of your degree.

ptilsen

CISPhD wrote: »

Another opinion from a hiring manager here... School accreditation isn't too big of a deal within most private organizations such as manufacturing, engineering, or professional services.

I agree with this, but I hold that the mere fact of being non-regionally accredited almost by definition guarantees a school has either a bad reputation or little to no reputation. Thus, I believe non-regionally accredited schools, even for the purpose of private, non-governmental industry are bad. I won't go as far as to say that non-regionally accredited degrees are worthless, but I stand by the opinion that they will almost invariably be treated with less regard than regionally accredited equivalents.

U of P is unfortunately not a good example for this topic, because despite its reputation as a diploma mill, it is regionally accredited.

CISPhD

Arizona State University's online degree programs are some of the best in the world, and are only nationally accredited. I don't mean to bicker back and forth here, but I'm insinuating that your observations are a bit short sighted. Sorry for sounding crass.

ahardinjr

I concur with the other replies. Your friend should look for a regionally-accrediated (RA) university over a nationally-accrediated (NA) one. I think the two major cons to getting an NA degree from a for-profit university such as Grantham University is poor reputation and potential inability to transfer credits into a graduate degree.

Building on one of the previous posts, an NA degree from Grantham University will most definitely be be treated with less regard than RA equivalents, especially B&M schools offering online programs. If your friend were to apply for a programming position with other recent graduates with the same amount of experience and background, but they have an RA degree from a more well-recognized, respected, and creditable school - they will most likely get chosen over your friend.

Moreover, if your friend decides to later pursue graduate students and possibly a doctorate degree later in his career, the last thing he will want to do is worry about the validity of his NA degree. There are alot of RA options available to your friend that he should just throw all NA school out the door and solely look at RA schools.

My thoughts are that since there are many RA options, it is not worth the risk to get a NA degree, especially with for-profit and online only school still be stigmatized in Academia.

ahardinjr

CISPhD wrote: »

Arizona State University's online degree programs are some of the best in the world, and are only nationally accredited. I don't mean to bicker back and forth here, but I'm insinuating that your observations are a bit short sighted. Sorry for sounding crass.

According to their website, they are regionally accrediated by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges.

State Regulatory Authorizations and Accreditation

CISPhD

I will concur on NA degrees not transferring to RA degrees for graduate studies. While the OP was centric to employer interpretations of NA degrees, I'm willing to tangent and suggest that no RA school will accept a degree form an NA school. Additionally, if you ever wish to pursue a teaching opportunity, an NA degree may create some hurdles for you there as well.

CISPhD

ahardinjr wrote: »

According to their website, they are regionally accrediated by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges.

State Regulatory Authorizations and Accreditation

Seems my source may have been a bit dated.

At any rate, 15 out of 50 states aren't on the list. My main point was there are a myriad of high quality schools who either haven't achieved the more widely accepted regional accreditation yet, or are simply not inclined to do so.

Valsacar

CISPhD wrote: »

... At any rate, 15 out of 50 states aren't on the list...

What list?