Regents USNY: Quo Vadis ?
DomingoJ
Dear Friends in the know:
As we all have heard, old beloved USNY - Regents College will be dropping their
affiliation with the University of the State of New York, or at least be
acquiring "independence" as of 1 Jan 1998 - yet it is said that their degrees
will still be validated (or whatever the term is) by USNY.
Bottom-line question: will it still say " University of the State of New York"
on its diplomas after Jan 1 - or if not, is it good form to put " University
of the State of New York" in brackets after Regents College when listing a
Regents' degree earned after 1 Jan 1998 in one's resume' ?
Jonathan Liu
> domi...@aol.com (DomingoJ) writes: > Dear Friends in the know:
check http://www.regents.edu/716.htm
Beginning on January 1, Regents College will be governed by its own
board of trustees which will be drawn initially from our current Board
of Overseers, a body which has been advising the Board of Regents on the
operation of the College since 1986. This governance change does not
affect
the academic integrity of our degree programs nor our accreditation
status.
It means that, effective January 1, 1998, diplomas will be awarded
by the new Regents College Board of Trustees.
If you are currently enrolled and complete degree requirements on or
before December
31, 1997, your diploma will be issued by The University of the State
of New York. If you enroll on or after January 1, 1998 or were enrolled
prior to December 31, 1997 but complete degree requirements after that
date, your diploma will be issued by the Trustees of Regents College. If
you believe that you will meet requirements for a degree by December 31,
1997, please complete the enclosed form and mail
or fax it to our Records Office.
Lawrie Miller
> domi...@aol.com (DomingoJ) writes: > Dear Friends in the know:
> SNIP
> > Bottom-line question: will it still say " University of the State of New York"
> > on its diplomas after Jan 1 - or if not, is it good form to put " University
> > of the State of New York" in brackets after Regents College when listing a
> > Regents' degree earned after 1 Jan 1998 in one's resume' ?
> >
> DR_WETSCH wrote:
> I recently left a previous post on this same topic about a week ago.
> You may want to find it on dejanews (http://www.dejanews.com).
> Regents College will be a member of USNY. You can also check out
> information that the College has online at http://www.regents.edu
>
> John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
> President
> Regents College Alumni Association
Could you address the second part of domingoj's question directly.
Will those completing degree requirements after 31st December
1997 and graduating on or after 1st January 1998 be misleading
prospective employers and others if they style themselves as
graduates of "Regents College (University of the State of New
York)"?
DR_WETSCH
> affiliation with the University of the State of New York, or at least be
> acquiring "independence" as of 1 Jan 1998 - yet it is said that their degrees
> will still be validated (or whatever the term is) by USNY.
>
> on its diplomas after Jan 1 - or if not, is it good form to put " University
> of the State of New York" in brackets after Regents College when listing a
> Regents' degree earned after 1 Jan 1998 in one's resume' ?
>
>
DR_WETSCH
Lawrie Miller <LA...@ix.netcom.com> writes: >
>
>
> Could you address the second part of domingoj's question directly.
> Will those completing degree requirements after 31st December
> 1997 and graduating on or after 1st January 1998 be misleading
> prospective employers and others if they style themselves as
> York)"?
>
Graduates should always reflect the proper name of the College and
University they are graduating from on their resume. A graduate
could use "Regents College, member of University of the State of
New York." Also, the independence of Regents College should eventually
alleviate problems of confusion between USNY and SUNY degrees.
For additional Q&A's on the USNY transition Jonathan Liu's post
provided the appropriate web site of http://www.regents.edu/717.htm
Martin Spillane
In article <685dl9$4252$1...@newssvr07-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>Lawrie Miller <LA...@ix.netcom.com> writes:> Will those completing degree
January 1998 be misleading>> prospective employers and others if they style
themselves as>> graduates of "Regents College (University of the State of
New York)"?
>
>Graduates should always reflect the proper name of the College and
>University they are graduating from on their resume. A graduate
>could use "Regents College, member of University of the State of
>New York." Also, the independence of Regents College should eventually
>alleviate problems of confusion between USNY and SUNY degrees.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Graduates, currently enrolled students and prospective EMPTORS should
also note that:
(1) The new literature from "Regents College - America's First Virtual
University" makes NO MENTION of any connection with the University of
the State of New York. The college thus does not appear to regard
"membership" as being a claim it, or by implication, its graduates can
make.
(2) The literature would also appear to be misleading because Regents
College is a "virtual college" and not a "virtual university."
(3) The "76,000 degrees" previously awarded were from the University of
the State of New York. As far as I am aware, Regents College has never
previously awarded a degree and all the people profiled in the catalog
are graduates of the University and not of Regents College as claimed.
Ths is not a matter of monor importance for it could significantly
mislead potential customers.
4) When I was accepted for graduate school, my degree diploma and
transcript were both prominently headed "University of the State of New
York" and both bore the University seal. The diploma was also signed by
the the New York State Commissioner for Education. I believe that these
factors were undoubtedly a major factor in securing the acceptance of
my degree for admission to grad school.
The USNY diploma illustrated in the college catalog was certainly a
major factor in my original decision to enrol with Regents College.
(That the new catalog does not show the diploma is interesting.)
The degree and transcript awarded in future will have NONE of these
features and whether the Regents College degree will be as widely
accepted or renowned remains to be seen.
(It may of course be that in many cases graduates of USNY were accepted
as much for their personal qualities and their possession of the
accredited degree merely enabled an admissions officer or employer to
tick a box on a form. Prviding Regents can continue to recruit on the
same basis, this factor should not change and is in their favour.)
(5) It has yet to be explained whether Regents have jumped or been
pushed. It is strange that when Thomas Edison State College is moving
closer to the New Jersey State Government, Regents College should be
separating. Previously the independent University of Buffalo made the
reverse journey to become SUNY Buffalo,taking its $38 Million endowment
with it.
(7) Apart from the maintainance of Regional Accreditation, an adequate
endowment fund is probably the most important factor in ensuring that a
private college can survive. As with the stock market, current fee
income is no guarantee of future success and whereas Regents College
previously had a "virtual" endowment through its sponsorship by New
York State, it has now moved out into a cold competitive world virtually
without a penny to its name.
(8) For reasons unknown, the Regents of the University of the State of
New York would not authorise the college to present candidates for the
degree of Master of Liberal Arts (MALS). Now that the college has
severed its connection with USNY, it will be free to award the MALS
degree, but as a college degree and not one awarded by the University of
the State of New York.
(8) As graduates of the University of the State of New York we have a
degree to be proud of:it may be some time before graduates of Regents
College can make the same claim.
ABOVE ALL, No one has removed the veil and explained why it is better
for students to graduate from a private Regents College rather than from
an insititution within the state system. Perhaps Dr.John Wetch would care
to take this task on board, rather than merely defending the college.
We live in interesting times...but as students and alumni, most of us
would prefer a quiet and certain life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrie Miller
Martin Spillane very effectively delineates what may be the key concern of
many current and would-be students of Regents College. The product being
marketed will clearly not be the same animal after Regents becomes an
independent entity. A degree conferred by Regents may well not receive
the same acceptance in the marketplace as would a degree conferred by
USNY.
I'm sure both John Wetch and current officials of Regents (who have posted
comments to this newsgroup) are aware of this. Exactly who does this change
in the status of Regents College benefit? If given the choice, how many
students
would opt to graduate from USNY rather than Regents College? A large
majority I suspect (>90%?). Name recognition counts. Dr Wetch commented
that another plus of the change would be an end to the confusion between
SUNY and USNY. Give me a break. A major plus would be if future
graduates continued to receive their degrees from the University of the State
of New York. Let us address those issues important to the customers who
are buying the product.
Regents College has an excellent set of programs. Most everyone who reads
this newsgroup knows that. I believe it when John Wetch and others say that
that will not change; but that is not the issue. The point is whether
management
at ABC inc. or the admissions office at XYZ university will deem a degree
from Regents College as worthwhile as a degree from USNY. I am repeating
myself, I know, but do so because those claiming to speak for Regents College
patently failed to address this question when it was first posed some months
ago
by Spillane. Will let Martin speak for himself, but suspect what he would like
is an acknowledgment that, contrary to the position taken by Regents College
and others, there is a clear downside risk in this change to independent status
both in terms of the marketability of their degrees and of their financial
stability.
On a related note, Regents has delayed its change to independent status. This
will not now occur for two or three months. This is good news for those who
might wish to scramble to complete their degree during this "window of
opportunity" and graduate from USNY.
Some1
Please excuse this ignorance from a Californian, but what is the
'University of the State of New York'? Did/does it have any degree
granting programs other than Regent's College? Is it an alternative name
for SUNY? Or is it simply an unusual local name for the state higher
education department?
For my part, I have to say that for years, when I heard 'Regent's
College of the University of the State of New York at Albany', I simply
assumed that meant 'State University of New York at Albany'. This name
change has the virtue of removing that potential confusion.
Bill
DR_WETSCH
user...@webtv.net (Some1) writes: > Please excuse this ignorance from a Californian, but what is the
Bill,
I have a page on the difference of USNY and SUNY at my web site at
http://pages.prodigy.com/NC/drjohn
There is some old Regents info there and this information will
soon be taken down as it is mostly obsolete. The USNY and SUNY
page is still relevant. The page was written by Doug Whitney
former Dean of Assessment at Regents College.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
Lawrie Miller <LA...@ix.netcom.com> writes: > Martin Spillane very effectively delineates what may be the key concern of
> many current and would-be students of Regents College. The product being
> marketed will clearly not be the same animal after Regents becomes an
> independent entity. A degree conferred by Regents may well not receive
> the same acceptance in the marketplace as would a degree conferred by
> USNY.
This is of course speculation and only the market will tell.
Will students now be turned off from Regents? Maybe? But it will
now be standing on its own feet.
>
> I'm sure both John Wetch and current officials of Regents (who have posted
> comments to this newsgroup) are aware of this. Exactly who does this change
> in the status of Regents College benefit? If given the choice, how many
> students
> would opt to graduate from USNY rather than Regents College? A large
> majority I suspect (>90%?). Name recognition counts.
Of course name recognition counts and Regentes is well aware that they
must be effective in presenting themselves as a separate entity.
>Dr Wetch commented
> that another plus of the change would be an end to the confusion between
> SUNY and USNY. Give me a break. A major plus would be if future
> graduates continued to receive their degrees from the University of the State
> of New York. Let us address those issues important to the customers who
> are buying the product.
Anyway, there has been confusion over USNY and SUNY with many Regents
graduates representing themselves (probably unintentionly) as SUNY grads
and hence a need to continuously explain the difference between
SUNY and USNY.
>
> Regents College has an excellent set of programs. Most everyone who reads
> this newsgroup knows that. I believe it when John Wetch and others say that
> that will not change; but that is not the issue. The point is whether
> management
> at ABC inc. or the admissions office at XYZ university will deem a degree
> from Regents College as worthwhile as a degree from USNY. I am repeating
> myself, I know, but do so because those claiming to speak for Regents College
> patently failed to address this question when it was first posed some months
> ago
> by Spillane. Will let Martin speak for himself, but suspect what he would like
> is an acknowledgment that, contrary to the position taken by Regents College
> and others, there is a clear downside risk in this change to independent status
>
> both in terms of the marketability of their degrees and of their financial
> stability.
<snip>
All of the issues delivered by you and Martin have already been addressed
at the highest levels at the College. I have personally been actively
involved in addressing these issues to the College, the College's Board
of Overseers, and to the Board of Regents. Nonetheless, it was the
final decision of the Board of Regents who voted for separation.
Thus an independent Regents College is going to happen and they are the
legitimate successor to the USNY/Regents College. So are alumni,
students, etc., going to support the new Regents College or see the
new College, that was sent off with the blessing of the Board of Regents
as a poor substitute? The decision to separate is a decision that only
time will tell if it was the right one. At the same time it is an
exciting chapter in the history of the College which will now have
the same autonomy under USNY as other colleges/universities
in New York state.
Martin Spillane
/All of the issues delivered by you and Martin have already been addressed
/at the highest levels at the College. I have personally been actively
/involved in addressing these issues to the College, the College's Board
/of Overseers, and to the Board of Regents. Nonetheless, it was the
/final decision of the Board of Regents who voted for separation.
/Thus an independent Regents College is going to happen and they are the
/legitimate successor to the USNY/Regents College. So are alumni,
/students, etc., going to support the new Regents College or see the
/new College, that was sent off with the blessing of the Board of Regents
/as a poor substitute? The decision to separate is a decision that only
/time will tell if it was the right one. At the same time it is an
/exciting chapter in the history of the College which will now have
/the same autonomy under USNY as other colleges/universities
/in New York state.
*So in reply to my questions we get sequitors, non-sequitors and John
Wetches' diary. what I wrote was:
Graduates, currently enrolled students and prospective EMPTORS should
note the points to which John Wetch has failed to respond:
***As I said before, we live in interesting times...but as students and
alumni, most of us would prefer a quiet and certain life and one in which our
reasonable questions received reasonable responses, both from the Alumni
President and from the College officials.
Erik Quackenbush
Martin Spillane wrote:
>
> The USNY diploma illustrated in the college catalog was certainly a
> major factor in my original decision to enrol with Regents College.
> (That the new catalog does not show the diploma is interesting.)
As a currently enrolled USNY student I must confess that this was
also a factor in my decision to choose Regents. Once the dust settles if
I am not somehow
'grandfathered' with an older USNY diploma (I don't expect to complete
my degree requirements
before June!) I will certainly consider asking for a refund and taking
my credits elsewhere.
I signed up for USNY long before this change was announced. I expected
to receive a USNY diploma for my efforts.
-Erik
--
Erik Quackenbush N3ZVC, IC Engineering Manager, Scala R & D
1-610-363-3343 mailto:erik.qua...@scala.com http://www.scala.com
Jonathan Whatley
In article <68s9e8$156e$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>,
Martin Spillane <Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote:
> (1) The new literature from "Regents College - America's First
> Virtual University" makes NO MENTION of any connection with the
> University of the State of New York. The college thus does not
> appear to regard "membership" as being a claim it, or by implication,
> its graduates can make.
This is an interesting point. Although the private Regents may be
a member the "University," it is questionable just how far a student
or graduate can attempt to apply this in real life. Would a claim to
have studied at, say, the "Bryant and Stratton Business Institute, of
the University of the State of New York" be at all legitimate? Would
a variant reworded to read "member of" be taken seriously? Might it
be at least arguably deceptive, given the context in which "member" of
a "University" is otherwise generally understood? Would the private
Regents have any claim to differing treatment by virtue of its past?
One curious result of the separation of Regents, btw, will be the
end of the exceptional situation in which a recognised accrediting
agency, the University of the State of New York, accredited ~itself~.
Jonathan Whatley
io...@interlog.com
DR_WETSCH
Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes: >
> >In article <685dl9$4252$1...@newssvr07-int.news.prodigy.com>,
> >DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
> /All of the issues delivered by you and Martin have already been addressed
> /at the highest levels at the College. I have personally been actively
> /involved in addressing these issues to the College, the College's Board
> /of Overseers, and to the Board of Regents. Nonetheless, it was the
> /final decision of the Board of Regents who voted for separation.
> /Thus an independent Regents College is going to happen and they are the
> /legitimate successor to the USNY/Regents College. So are alumni,
> /students, etc., going to support the new Regents College or see the
> /new College, that was sent off with the blessing of the Board of Regents
> /as a poor substitute? The decision to separate is a decision that only
> /time will tell if it was the right one. At the same time it is an
> /exciting chapter in the history of the College which will now have
> /the same autonomy under USNY as other colleges/universities
> /in New York state.
>
> *So in reply to my questions we get sequitors, non-sequitors and John
> Wetches' diary. what I wrote was:
>
> Graduates, currently enrolled students and prospective EMPTORS should
> note the points to which John Wetch has failed to respond:
>
own writings more closely. Let's suffice it to say that the major issues were covered in terms of the concerns that the alumni
had. We can always add sub-issues and even turn them into major ones
ad nauseum.......
> (1) The new literature from "Regents College - America's First Virtual
> University" makes NO MENTION of any connection with the University of
> the State of New York. The college thus does not appear to regard
> "membership" as being a claim it, or by implication, its graduates can
> make.
>
Why should it, I would perceive this as the College wanting to stand
on its own in its literature. Anyway, you fail to mention that on page 4
of the same literature it states, "Regents College was established
in 1971 by the Board of Regents of the University of the
State of New York." (Maybe they should have said Regents External Degrees
instead of Regents College and really confused everyone because Regents
College didn't exist when the program was first started, and so on...)
> (2) The literature would also appear to be misleading because Regents
> College is a "virtual college" and not a "virtual university."
semantics?? Unless we want to make a state case out of it because in NY
Regents doesn't qualify as a university. I would think, the term
"virtual university" implies to most distance learning of the higher ed.
kind as the name of the college is clearly Regents College. We also know
that the College has a few years to go before it must change its name.
>
> (3) The "76,000 degrees" previously awarded were from the University of
> the State of New York. As far as I am aware, Regents College has never
> previously awarded a degree and all the people profiled in the catalog
> are graduates of the University and not of Regents College as claimed.
> Ths is not a matter of monor importance for it could significantly
> mislead potential customers.
>
As stated earlier, in my previous post, the College, is the legitimate
successor of the USNY/Regents College. The Regents pointed out at the
last commencement that the College has gained maturity and will be
going independent. This is also why the College was awarded an absolute
charter as opposed to a provisional charter which is used for fledgling
and immature institutions. Thus it is true that Regents College grads
from the independent Regents College will not receive USNY degrees it
should be pointed out that SUNY, CUNY, and other NY college grads do not
receive USNY degrees. The independent Regents College will now fall in
line among them.
> 4) When I was accepted for graduate school, my degree diploma and
> transcript were both prominently headed "University of the State of New
> York" and both bore the University seal. The diploma was also signed by
> the the New York State Commissioner for Education. I believe that these
> factors were undoubtedly a major factor in securing the acceptance of
> my degree for admission to grad school.
>
> The USNY diploma illustrated in the college catalog was certainly a
> major factor in my original decision to enrol with Regents College.
> (That the new catalog does not show the diploma is interesting.)
>
> The degree and transcript awarded in future will have NONE of these
> features and whether the Regents College degree will be as widely
> accepted or renowned remains to be seen.
>
> (It may of course be that in many cases graduates of USNY were accepted
> as much for their personal qualities and their possession of the
> accredited degree merely enabled an admissions officer or employer to
> tick a box on a form. Prviding Regents can continue to recruit on the
> same basis, this factor should not change and is in their favour.)
Here again you missed my statement in the original post (snipped out
of the reprint above) on how time will tell how students and
employers will perceive the independent Regents College.
But, is this really such a hard road to follow. Regents started in 1971
under USNY when DL was very foreign to higher ed. The USNY support
surely gave then credibility to succeed. However, the climate is much
different today that an independent Regents probably has it easier in
attracting students that it did when it started under USNY. Nonetheless,
it will be the decision of the student to decide if they still need the
USNY "imprimatur" when choosing a DL school. I think we all agree that
this was a factor for many students but it no longer longer be an option
for anyone. Will a Charter Oak be given more prestige over a Regents
over a Thomas Edison over a XYZ DL institution? Maybe? Maybe Not?
According to the 11/17 Wall Street Journal article on "Cyberdegrees"
the University of Phoenix has 36,000 students. As such this university
thrives in the marketplace without USNY nor are they even associated
with USNY and they are private and independent. Some people on the
newsgroup do bash U of P while others laud it. Nonetheless,
it is a successful DL model and is a valid credential. The USNY degree
was probably the closest DL students have gotten to having a DL degree
that reflects in name and appearance a degree that appears more
traditional from the outside looking in due to its name. With the
large number of DL students in this country as well as DL alumni
from accredited institutions I would much rather put my fight into
saying that legitimate DL learning is just as good as traditional models
of higher education and put DL solidly into the mainstream.
We are still on the edge but no longer on the fringe of higher education.
When talking to an employer or to a graduate admissions committee why
should DL learners feel sheepish in stating that they earned the degree
in a DL format. Many do, and the reason is that they do not want to be
associated with the disreputable and have the immediate link to the
diploma mills that are seen advertised in the back of magazines. To make
my point on this just look at this newsgroup. How often does someone
make a post like "I want to earn am accredited DL degree from XYZ
University, how well accepted is the degree from this school."
In addition, we have ongoing debates on the acceptance of accredited
DL doctorates and master degrees. Why? The prestige of the DL degree
can only be entrenched when graduates are willing to stand up. To a
degree (no pun intended) USNY has been a shield to the perceived
reputation of USNY graduates.
>
> (5) It has yet to be explained whether Regents have jumped or been
> pushed. It is strange that when Thomas Edison State College is moving
> closer to the New Jersey State Government, Regents College should be
> separating. Previously the independent University of Buffalo made the
> reverse journey to become SUNY Buffalo,taking its $38 Million endowment
> with it.
>
This is surely a minor point? Do we need to research universities that
have went from public to private to make a balanced comparison. Is there
a hidden agenda or cover up that we need to expose here? If so, why?
> (7) Apart from the maintainance of Regional Accreditation, an adequate
> endowment fund is probably the most important factor in ensuring that a
> private college can survive. As with the stock market, current fee
> without a penny to its name.
>
Endowment is surely a necessity for a private college and alumni support
is an important asset to establishing one.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
halbeisen...@sprintmail.com (Pete) writes: > Really?
>
> Would a rose be a rose by any other name? By my esitmation, of course
> it would!
>
> Any bickering about the name change, seems to me, to discredit the
> institution and the people who have served us well. I see the
> severing of ties with USNY as a vote of confidence that RC can stand
> on its own merits. Whether it remains RC or chooses a different name,
> I believe it will remain one of the premier undergraduate distance
> learning institution for working adults.
>
> Let's not let emphasis on the <name> of an institution (v.
> accreditation) cast doubt on the distance learning process.
>
> Aside from that, the deed has been done.
>
> Pete Halbeisen
> BS with concentration in math expected June 98
>
Pete,
An excellent summary to the issue. The real value to a real
DL education is what you are able to make out of it.
Also, the Regents faculty surely are not jumping ship and are there
to insure the integrity of the degree. These folks are currently
in some top notch positions at other universities. In addition,
the administration must work hard to keep the wheels of the institution
turning.
Best to you as you complete your degree studies.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
Martin Spillane
In article <68uujp$1768$1...@newssvr07-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
/> ..
/>
/> All of the issues delivered by you and Martin have already been addressed
/> at the highest levels at the College. I have personally been actively
/> involved in addressing these issues to the College, the College's Board
/> of Overseers, and to the Board of Regents.
MGS *All we ask is that you share some of this with us, or even preferably
that William Stewart of Regents College should.
/>JW: Martin, if any non-sequiturs exist [in my writing] I would ask that
you examine yourown writings more closely.
MGS * If such exist in my writing, I am sure you (and others) will be kind
enough to point them out to me.
JW/Let's suffice it to say that the major >issues were covered in terms of
the concerns that the alumni had.
MGS *So OK, now share it with us and put our fears to rest.
/>
/>>MGS (1) The new literature from "Regents College - America's First Virtual
/>> University" makes NO MENTION of any connection with the University of
/>> the State of New York. The college thus does not appear to regard
/>> "membership" as being a claim it, or by implication, its graduates
/can make.
/>>
/>JW: Why should it, I would perceive this as the College wanting to stand
/>on its own in its literature. Anyway, you fail to mention that on page 4
/>of the same literature it states, "Regents College was established
/>in 1971 by the Board of Regents of the University of the
/>State of New York."
/
MGS * And now it is 1998...and nothing has changed.
/>>MGS (2) The literature would also appear to be misleading because Regents
/> College is a "virtual college" and not a "virtual university."
/>
/>JW:...semantics??Unless we want to make a state case out of it because in
/NY Regents doesn't qualify as a university.
MGS *If "Regents doesn't qualify as a university," then why the claim? And in
any case, wouldn't it be a Federal case?
/>> MGS(3) The "76,000 degrees" previously awarded were from the University
of the State of New York. As far as I am aware, Regents College has never
/>> previously awarded a degree and all the people profiled in the catalog
/>> are graduates of the University and not of Regents College as claimed.
/>> This is not a matter of minor importance for it could significantly
mislead potential customers.
>
/>JW: As stated earlier, in my previous post, the College, is the legitimate
/>successor of the USNY/Regents College.
/
*MGS: So OK, who is arguing? The point is still that Regents College has not
previously awarded a single degree, never mind 76,000..
/>JW: The Regents pointed out at the last commencement that the College has
/>gained maturity and will be going independent.
*MGS: 'The Regents" also pointed out that the college would be leaving
the State system, apparently without the option to remain within it. "The
Regents" did not explain to whose benefit this was.
/JW: This is also why the College was awarded an
/absolute charter as opposed to a provisional charter which is used for
/fledgling and immature institutions.
*MGS: According to the Regents College webpage the college received a
charter which, absolute or provisional, has not permitted Regents College,
mature or fledgling, to leave the nest.
>JW: Thus it is true that Regents College grads
>from the independent Regents College will not receive USNY degrees it
>should be pointed out that SUNY, CUNY, and other NY college grads do
>not receive USNY degrees. The independent Regents College will now fall in
>line among them.
>
***MGS: With the greatest respect, this is absolute garbage, as you must
come to realise after less than a millisecond's reflection. The
"independent Regents College will NOT "FALL IN LINE AMONG THEM." That is
the crux of the matter and if they were this dialog would not be taking
place.
Regents SUNY or Regents CUNY would be perfectly acceptable. Regents BLANK
is the concern.
/>MGS 4) When I was accepted for graduate school, my degree diploma and
/>> transcript were both prominently headed "University of the State of New
/>> York" and both bore the University seal. The diploma was also signed by
/>> the the New York State Commissioner for Education. I believe that these
/>> factors were undoubtedly a major factor in securing the acceptance of
/>> my degree for admission to grad school.
/>JW: Here again you missed my statement in the original post (snipped out
/>of the reprint above) on how time will tell how students and
/>employers will perceive the independent Regents College.
*MGS: This is tremedous consolation for those who are about to graduate..
."ONLY TIME WILL TELL...." Most of us don't have time on our side and
this may be a persons only shot.
/>JW: But, is this really such a hard road to follow. Regents started in
1971 under USNY when DL was very foreign to higher ed. The USNY support
/>surely gave then credibility to succeed. However, the climate is much
/>different today that an independent Regents probably has it easier in
/>attracting students that it did when it started under USNY.
*MGS: This is arguable: (a) When it started it was in 'virgin' territory
and there was a very large backlog queing up to apply. That is why Nyquist
started it.
/
JW: Nonetheless,
/>it will be the decision of the student to decide if they still need the
/>USNY "imprimatur" when choosing a DL school.
*MGS: And if they decide they DO, where should they go?
/ JW: I think we all agree that this was a factor for many students but it
no longer longer be an option for anyone. Will a Charter Oak be given more
/prestige over a Regents over a Thomas Edison over a XYZ DL institution?
Maybe? Maybe Not?According to the 11/17 Wall Street Journal article on
"Cyberdegrees"
/>the University of Phoenix has 36,000 students. As such this university
/>thrives in the marketplace without USNY nor are they even associated
/>with USNY and they are private and independent. Some people on the
/>newsgroup do bash U of P while others laud it. Nonetheless,
/>it is a successful DL model and is a valid credential.
*MGS: OK. So how many people "laud" and how many "bash" the USNY degree?
Therein lies your answer.
JW: The USNY degree
/>was probably the closest DL students have gotten to having a DL degree
/>that reflects in name and appearance a degree that appears more
/>traditional from the outside looking in due to its name.
*MGS: Are you denigrating it for this? Are you suggesting that it was not
as worthy as the traditional degree it "resembled"? Are you suggesting
that the future of Regents College lies in presenting a degree which lacks
the cachet of a traditional degree?
JW: With the
/>large number of DL students in this country as well as DL alumni
/>from accredited institutions I would much rather put my fight into
/>saying that legitimate DL learning is just as good as traditional models
/>of higher education and put DL solidly into the mainstream.
*MGS: The vast majority of Regents College students do in fact have a
great deal of college credit which they earned in the traditional way.
As was shown by my research in 1994-5, the typical Regents College student
has nearly always been pretty close to graduation in terms of determination,
experience and accademic credit.
*MGS: Regents College has not in fact been a DL institution, it has
always been a "Distance Assessment" program.
/>We are still on the edge but no longer on the fringe of higher education.
/>When talking to an employer or to a graduate admissions committee why
/>should DL learners feel sheepish in stating that they earned the degree
/>in a DL format. Many do, and the reason is that they do not want to be
/>associated with the disreputable and have the immediate link to the
/>diploma mills that are seen advertised in the back of magazines. To make
/>my point on this just look at this newsgroup. How often does someone
/>make a post like "I want to earn am accredited DL degree from XYZ
/>University, how well accepted is the degree from this school."
*MGS: Which takes us back to Regents USNY or Regents BLANK !!!!.
/>In addition, we have ongoing debates on the acceptance of accredited
/>DL doctorates and master degrees. Why? The prestige of the DL degree
/>can only be entrenched when graduates are willing to stand up. To a
/>degree (no pun intended) USNY has been a shield to the perceived
/>reputation of USNY graduates.
*MGS: So now they are to be sent out unarmed and naked to see if the new
'Virtual' shield is effective ??? Doesn't this have a familiar ring to it?
/>MGS: (5) It has yet to be explained whether Regents have jumped or been
>> pushed. It is strange that when Thomas Edison State College is moving
>> closer to the New Jersey State Government, Regents College should be
>> separating. Previously the independent University of Buffalo made the
>> reverse journey to become SUNY Buffalo,taking its $38 Million endowment
>> with it.
>>
>JW: This is surely a minor point? Do we need to research universities
that have went from public to private to make a balanced comparison. *Is
there a hidden agenda or cover up that we need to expose here?If so,why?*
*MGS (a) $38 Million is never a minor point, at last not on my planet.
(b) <<"Is there a hidden agenda or cover up that we need to expose
here?">> When this question is posed by the Alumni President (even
rhetorically), we lesser mortals tend to sit up and take notice. If (by
the remotest and most unlikely chance) there is, then presumably the
answer to the second question must obvious.
/>>MGS: (7) Apart from the maintainance of Regional Accreditation, an
adequate endowment fund is probably the most important factor in
ensuring that a private college can survive.
/>JW: Endowment is surely a necessity for a private college and alumni
support is an important asset to establishing one.
*MGS: Absolutely - and so will the alumnus or alumina (Regents college USNY
or Regents College BLANK) willing to donate the first million towards the
$38 million target please step up to the plate...?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane BS '93 spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
(Paid Up Life Member of Regents College (USNY) Alumni Association)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane
In article <68v158$63sm$1...@newssvr07-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>halbeisen...@sprintmail.com (Pete) writes: > Really?
>>
>> Would a rose be a rose by any other name? By my esitmation, of course
>> it would!
*Of course it would, and the Regents College rose may still be a rose. The
differnce is that it will no longer come with the gold seal of the USNY
attached to it. Whether that will make a difference remains t be seen.
>>
>> Any bickering about the name change, seems to me, to discredit the
>> institution and the people who have served us well.
Not so. These fine people will continue to serve, but like anyone who
lives through a merger or a buyout they may have no control over the
quality of the product as such matters will be determined at top level
and not by those whin the college o carry out the process. The problem
here is that those at top level seem unwilling to discuss the basis
reasons for the change or t acknowledge that alumni and students have
legitimate concerns.
>> severing of ties with USNY as a vote of confidence that RC can stand
>> on its own merits.
*There is no doubt that the Regents College system can stand on its own
merits, but that is not the point. As the University f the State of New
York will no longer be directly granting the degree and the degree will
not have the backing of the State system (as at SUNY CUNY etc), we can
only judge if we know if the college jumped out of the New York State
system or was pushed.
> Whether it remains RC or chooses a different name,
>> I believe it will remain one of the premier undergraduate distance
>> learning institution for working adults.
*Regents College has never been a "distance learning institution." It
has always been a distance assessment institution and no-one has
actually been taught by the college.
>>
>> Let's not let emphasis on the <name> of an institution (v.
>> accreditation) cast doubt on the distance learning process.
>>
*The name of the institution is the least of the problems.As Pete says
"a rose by any other name, etc," but as I say, what actually lies behind
the change?'
>> Aside from that, the deed has been done.
*Judging by the Regents College webpage, it been in fact been half done.
There s no doubt tat the change will go through and it may be that in
twenty-five years time there will be great celebrations. What matters now,
however, is that Regents College has left the State system and no-one will
say why this was necessary or to whom it is beneficial. Until that mystery
is resolved it will be to the next five years we will be looking.
>>
>> Pete Halbeisen
>> BS with concentration in math expected June 98
>>
>
John Wetch wrote:
>Pete,
>
>An excellent summary to the issue.
*The problem is that John Wetch, alumni President, is wearing "rose-
tinted spectacles" and is so busy backing the college management that
he appears to be insensitive to the genuine concerns of his constituents.
Flattering his supporters and largely ignoring his critics does not
advance the debate and will not put the issue to rest.
> The real value to a real
>DL education is what you are able to make out of it.
*Has anyone argued to the contrary?
>
>Also, the Regents faculty surely are not jumping ship and are there
>to insure the integrity of the degree.
*As far as Regents College is concerned the "faculty" are not "faculty"
as university faculty are traditionally known, but function as advisors
to the college on specific academic subject- and course related matters.
None of them appear to have come to the defence of the college
administration and I have no reason to believe that they were actually
consulted in the matter of the college leaving the state system.
Given their previous function at Regents College as non-teaching academic
advisors they would probably not expect to be consulted in such matters.
If I am wrong on this, then no doubt Bill Stewart from the college will
jump in and correct me on this (and other matters).
>These folks are currently
>in some top notch positions at other universities. In addition,
>the administration must work hard to keep the wheels of the institution
>turning.
>
*How could anyone dispute this, but does it actually advance the debate?
>Best to you [Pete] as you complete your degree studies.
*A happy note on which to end and one upon which we can all agree.
I hope all goes well for you Pete, and that your degree will enable you to
fulfil your dreams and ambitions, as I believe ours have done for both
John Wetch and myself.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrie Miller
DR_WETSCH wrote:
> halbeisen...@sprintmail.com (Pete) writes: > Really?
> >
> > Would a rose be a rose by any other name? By my esitmation, of course
> > it would!
> >
> > Any bickering about the name change, seems to me, to discredit the
> > institution and the people who have served us well.
So, we should all join John Wetsch in trumpeting the "exciting times"
thatlie ahead and completely ignore the downside risks. Why should full
frank discussion of this important topic bring discredit on the institution?
Regents college is in the business of providing higher education products
and services, it is not a Holy See.
> I see the
> > severing of ties with USNY as a vote of confidence that RC can stand
> > on its own merits. Whether it remains RC or chooses a different name,
> > I believe it will remain one of the premier undergraduate distance
> > learning institution for working adults.
> >
> > Let's not let emphasis on the <name> of an institution (v.
> > accreditation) cast doubt on the distance learning process.
The argument has to do with the lack of candor surrounding potentialnegative
consequences of Regents becoming an independent institution,
not the merits of the distance learning process.
> >
> > Aside from that, the deed has been done.
> >
> > Pete Halbeisen
> > BS with concentration in math expected June 98
> >
>
> Pete,
>
> An excellent summary to the issue. The real value to a real
> DL education is what you are able to make out of it.
And what you are able to make out of it very much dependsupon the name of
the institution written on the diploma. Those
who enrolled in Regents expecting to walk away with a USNY
degree may be forgiven for thinking they are now being sold
a bill of goods.
>
>
> Also, the Regents faculty surely are not jumping ship and are there
> to insure the integrity of the degree. These folks are currently
> in some top notch positions at other universities. In addition,
> the administration must work hard to keep the wheels of the institution
> turning.
>
And the administration must work hard to ensure they do not misleadexisting
and prospective students into thinking that the move to
independent status will not adversely affect the utility of their degrees
in the real world. Surely truth in advertising requires that a caveat to
that affect be added to their web site.
> Best to you as you complete your degree studies.
>
> John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
First a note to the critics: (Martin did post that I am ignoring them
and I do want to correct this) that is, the posts by Lawrie Miller
and Martin Spillane (I refrain from reposting the lengthy diatribes
and will thus start my own).
I find it interesting that you resort to various flames to try to
make your point and discredit opinion through personal attacks and
associations. Ahhh, the zen of newsgrouping. Unfortunately, I started
to find myself doing the same thing so this argument is obviously
degenerating into personal affronts for the basis of opinion
(i.e. my rose colored glasses -- actually I do not wear glasses
and have perfect vision.)
So I will hope to post my last response on this issue unless these
critics can really post something of merit and make an attempt to
understand my issues. I am not into rehashing old arguments or "picking
the bones" on words of a newgroup post. This is nothing more than
"beating a dead horse." (I seem full of old cliches tonight)
I could just make a Spillane like post and say their comments
are "garbage." However, this would just give Mr. Spillane more
ammunition. Why even make a positive comment as the Spillane and
Miller pictures are painted black.
I interpret the bottom line of both of their arguments as there
is negative impact to the USNY and Regents College separation. This
is a definite possibility but the opposite is very much true as well.
It is the opposite side of the fence, that is, the positive side
that they fail to see or even acknowledge. Mr. Spillane well knows
that a formal letter was submitted to the Board of Regents addressing
the concerns of the alumni including the potential for negative impacts
regarding the separation. The Regents voted to separate anyway.
Regardless of the politics of the situation, how the decision came about,
or who is graduating from where...the DECISION has now been made.
Live with it. (Or, I guess you are unable to do so. I can't wait to see
the verbal attack on that one.)
I found it interesting that Lawrie wanted to turn this away from a DL
issue and into a negative impact issue. The logic did escape you. If
you say there are potential negative impacts, I ask, why are they
negative? I make the argument that it is negative due to the perceived
loss of prestige in the degree. Why are we concerned about loss of
degree prestige? The answer: because it is a DL degree and the
perception that can surround distance education can be negative.
Many want the prestige of a degree from USNY. Various examples
were made which should have been sufficient for a newsgroup post
to make my point. If this wasn't the issue then what is the negative
impact issue? Hey, I can be wrong!
Next, the issues I raised were also to illustrate the point that neither
Martin or Lawrie have a crystal ball. They paint the whole issue as a
negative one and attack any positive post to the issue but really do
not have any solid basis to support their claims -- that is, to prove
the negative impacts. They are nothing more than concerns. It must be
nice to be able to take an adversarial role and call attention to
yourself over issues that are already decided. I think that when I
stated and I will try to so do again that the personal decision by
potential students to enroll in Regents will be a test of time and the
College will have to live with the decision of the Board of Regents
as something that will turn out to be good or bad for the College.
Obviously, Lawrie and Martin are opting that the decision was a
terrible mistake. I wish I was able to prognosticate to such a degree
that I can make their statements with such surety. I find that they
are unable to even see a balance. If the Regents should reverse their
decision or the independent Regents College should fail then Lawrie
and Martin are right.
Let me try a negative twist and paint another negative concern
(however, this one is really a non-sequitur) and fall in with the
Martin and Lawrie mob: The Board of Regents is not happy with all of
the hassle the College is getting over the separation issue due
to the Martin and Lawrie posts. They are reversing their decision to
make the College independent (the mob cheers); however, they have
decided to close their grand experiment due to all of the other great DL
opportunities now available (the mob now boos, but the deed is done).
Heck, I might as well just make the illogic argument that the new
Regents degree will soon be as good as a Harvard degree. Let's see, for the
the following reasons:
1.) Both are regionally accredited
2.) Regents College is the oldest distance education college in the U.S. and
Harvard is the oldest college in the U.S. Thus, Regents will evolve
and become an Ivy League school.
3.) Radcliffe College starts with an R and so does Regents. The new name
for the independent Regents will be Radclif thus making it sound like
a Harvard college. This will keep the tradition of the USNY/SUNY
confusion intact.
4.) Both schools reside in states that were British colonies.
5.) Regents will soon join the ranks of Harvard as a private institution.
Such as they are, I find the above rationale about as logical, for most
of the responses, made by Martin and Lawrie. Thus, your responses
are unfortunately irritating. You make your point, which is
acknowledged, and expect some sort of expose'. When a response is given
you raise the same old flags. Please give me something new and in a
fair objective manner. From what I have seen I do not see it possible
but I do have hope.
You should now have enough napalm so let the flames begin....
John
Martin Spillane
In article <691fk6$k24$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>I find it interesting that you resort to various flames to try to
>make your point and discredit opinion through personal attacks and
>associations. Ahhh, the zen of newsgrouping. Unfortunately, I started
>to find myself doing the same thing so this argument is obviously
>degenerating into personal affronts for the basis of opinion
>(i.e. my rose colored glasses -- actually I do not wear glasses
>and have perfect vision.)
John,
Metaphorically you do - they are rose tinted and fail to correct myopoia.
That is not a flame but an observation.
I don't need to flame - the logic I aim at your arguments is far more
deadly.
Now just give us a straight answer to the following questions:
(a) Who gains from Regents College becoming a private institution?
(b) Why do you claim (as I understand that you do) students will be
better off with a degree from Regents College BLANK than Regents College
USNY?
(c) Why is the college being so secretive about the whole matter?
(d) Why do the College leave it to you as Alumni President to defend a
decision in which you presumably had little or no say?
(e) If you have no information on what the snarl-up is on the new
charter coming into force, how can you defend the position of the College
on associated issues?
(f) When you say "Mr. Spillane well knows that a formal letter was
submitted to the Board of Regents addressing the concerns of the alumni
including the potential for negative impacts regarding the separation.
The Regents voted to separate anyway." are you in fact saying that the
Regents themselves decided to kick the college out of the USNY nest?
(g)You ask "Why are we concerned about loss of degree prestige?" and
then answer "because it is a DL degree and the perception that can
surround distance education can be negative." This is a non-sequitor,
for if the university at Albany were to leave SUNY and become Albany
College BLANK an argument very similar to this one would undoubtedly
ensue. Do you in fact agree that if Regents College USNY had become
Regents College SUNY, there would be none the current dismay?
(h) When you say: "Many want the prestige of a degree from USNY' this is
surely a tacit admission that they will not get that prestige from
Regents College BLANK?
(i) You say "I think that when I stated and I will try to so do again
that the personal decision by potential students to enroll in Regents
will be a test of time and the College will have to live with the
decision of the Board of Regents as something that will turn out to be
good or bad for the College." Does this not clearly imply that the
college was pushed out of the state system and that the students have
no option but to accept it?
(j) You say: "Let me try a negative twist and paint another negative
concern (however, this one is really a non-sequitur) and fall in with the
Martin and Lawrie mob [*note I regard the term 'mob' not so much a flame
as a damp squibb. MGS*]: The Board of Regents is not happy with all of
the hassle the College is getting over the separation issue due
to the Martin and Lawrie posts. They are reversing their decision to
make the College independent (the mob cheers); however, they have
decided to close their grand experiment due to all of the other great DL
opportunities now available (the mob now boos, but the deed is done)."
*Do you really think that these are alternatives?
(k) You write and I then comment: "Heck, I might as well just make the
illogic argument that the new Regents degree will soon be as good as a
Harvard degree. Let's see, for the the following reasons:
>
>1.) Both are regionally accredited [BUT HARVARD WAS FOUNDED 270 YEARS
BEFORE ACCREDITATION WAS EVEN THOUGHT OF AND HAPPENS TO BE RATHER WELL
ENDOWED]
>
>2.) Regents College is the oldest distance education college in the U.S.
and>Harvard is the oldest college in the U.S. Thus, Regents will evolve
>and become an Ivy League school. [IN THE 1880s THE CHATAUQUA UNIVERSITY
OF NEW YORK HAD A CHARTER AS A PRIVATE INSTITUTION TO PROVIDE DISTANCE
EDUCATION AND AWARD DEGREES. IT ENROLLED AND GRADUATED STUDENTS IN THE US
AND CANADA BUT IT DID NOT SURVIVE.]
>
>3.) Radcliffe College starts with an R and so does Regents. The new
name >for the independent Regents will be Radclif thus making it sound
like >a Harvard college. This will keep the tradition of the USNY/SUNY
>confusion intact. [AND NOW WE ARE GETTING *REALLY* SILLY, AREN'T WE.-
no, not a flame, not even a spark.]
>
>4.) Both schools reside in states that were British colonies. [DITTO]
>
>5.) Regents will soon join the ranks of Harvard as a private
institution.>[AND POSSIBLY OF THE CHATAUQUA UNIVERSITY. CAN I RECOMMEND
THAT YOU READ: "Will Private Universities Survive? A Study of Five That
Did Not" by John Oliver Hall, PhD thesis, University of Pittsburgh,
1968? ALL FIVE WERE ABSORBED INTO THEIR STATE SYSTEM).
(l) Why isn't Regents College following the more logical course of going into
SUNY (as did the Univ.of Buffalo), rather than being given away by the
Regents at a bargain basement price, i.e. Zero dollars, when private status
will allow it to be bought and sold as a commercial concern.
(m) >"Such as they are, I find the above rationale about as logical, for
most>of the responses, made by Martin and Lawrie. Thus, your responses
>are unfortunately irritating. You make your point, which is>acknowledged,
and expect some sort of expose'. When a response is given >you raise the
same old flags. Please give me something new and in a>fair objective
manner. From what I have seen I do not see it possible>but I do have
hope."
*** OK, John. I realise that *not* answering these questions over and over
again must be very frustrating. So why not give someone at the college a
call and say, "Hey now, I am President of the Alumni Association, not of
the college, so why am I doing this job?"
DR_WETSCH
Martin,
You have made my point beautifully. Your last post was more bone picking an rehash.
You even had to respond to those items that were clearly meant as a joke
(at least I thought so) -- that is the decision of the Regents to reverse
their decision and the Regents and Hardvard comparison.
No point in arguing with you. You accuse me of being the attack dog for
the College and you also slam the representation of the alumni assocation
for the alumni as you keep asking for some type of full disclosure,
You ask me to come out in the open or else someone from the College to
do so. You know what that representation of the alumni association has
been and what has been presented thus you obviously consider it
inadequate. Otherwise you are playing both sides of the fence on your
issues.
John
nesl...@amherst.edu
In Article <691t8p$g9s$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes:
>In article <691fk6$k24$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
>DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>(a) Who gains from Regents College becoming a private institution?
No one has raised the question of money. How much were the taxpayers
of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians decide that
a program that served so many people from outside New York wasn't a
good use of tax money?
I have no idea what the answer to this is -- it just seems like
an obvious question to ask.
I had been closely following the plan to start a Regents MALS
program. I was considering enrolling in a brand new program but
I'm not interested in a new program at a college without a track
record, which is how I see the new private Regents.
-- Nancy Slator
Martin Spillane
In article <692jds$13qc$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>
>Martin,
>
>You have made my point beautifully. Your last post was more bone picking
an rehash.
*It was in fact summary of the valid questions on the issue to which there
have as yet been no valid response.
>You even had to respond to those items that were clearly meant as a joke
>(at least I thought so) -- that is the decision of the Regents to reverse
>their decision and the Regents and Hardvard comparison.
>
*I did not realise that you regarded this rather serious matter as
a "joke." Do you realise that you are probably alone in this?
>No point in arguing with you.
*Not unless you have a case to argue, which you evidently do not.
>You accuse me of being the attack dog for the College
*I have made no such accusation, but if the collar fits and you are
comfortable wearing it...
>and you also slam the representation of the alumni assocation
>for the alumni as you keep asking for some type of full disclosure,
*I did not "slam the representation of the alumni association for
the alumni" and never have. The statement is a non sequetor, for "asking
for some type of full disclosure" by the college cannot possibly be
interpreted as "slamming" the Alumni Association.
Yes, I have asked for disclosure - and, given that you are acting as the
conduit for information from the college, is it unreasonable to ask you?
>You ask me to come out in the open or else someone from the College to
>do so.
*Again, a not unreasonable request...
>You know what that representation of the alumni association has
>been and what has been presented thus you obviously consider it
>inadequate.
*No, I have not said that. What I have said is that I believe that the
reponse from the college has been wholly inadequate.
>Otherwise you are playing both sides of the fence on your issues.
*I am sorry, but this defeats me. Which sides? What fence????
***Now can the Alumni President stop blowing smoke (as one of my email
correspondents so beautifully put it) and give us some answers?
Emil Knutti
Martin Spillane wrote in message <6930fs$1mr6$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>...
>In article <692jds$13qc$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
>DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>>
And the debate goes on! Anyone ever thought about setting up a newsgroup to
debate this issue. Frankly I am a bit tired of it here. But then I am just
a surfer so maybe my voice doesn't count.
Some1
Since this thread seems to be devolving into a flame-war, I
hesitate to stick my head in. Worse, I'm largely ignorant about the NY
academic system. But in this case ignorance might be an advantage,
because one issue seems to be how the "new" Regents will be accepted by
outsiders.
I had no idea what the USNY was until a few days ago, when I
learned that it is "the state educational umbrella for the New York
state educational system" (quote from Dr. Wetsch's site). Apparently it
is not a conventional university at all, being more akin to the
California State Department of Education. I am willing to bet that few
people outside NY have any idea what it is. So, does the loss of a name
few have heard of seriously diminish the value of a Regents degree? If a
potential employer knows enough about NY education to have heard about
the USNY, they probably know Regents as well. Probably the effect of
losing the name is being exaggerated.
Bill
Lawrie Miller
nesl...@amherst.edu wrote:
> In Article <691t8p$g9s$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
> Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes:
> >In article <691fk6$k24$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
> >DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
> SNIP
> -- Nancy Slator Wrote
>
> No one has raised the question of money. How much were the taxpayers
> of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians decide that
> a program that served so many people from outside New York wasn't a
> good use of tax money?
All these questions were raised with the Board of Regents.
>
>
> I have no idea what the answer to this is -- it just seems like
> an obvious question to ask.
It is important that you ignore the obvious when forming and opinionabout
the underlying reasons for Regents change of status. And
remember, this is an exciting time for the College!
>
>
> I had been closely following the plan to start a Regents MALS
> program. I was considering enrolling in a brand new program but
> I'm not interested in a new program at a college without a track
> record, which is how I see the new private Regents.
>
Regents College is the legitimate successor to Regents college/USNYand
there will no longer be confusion between it and SUNY. The
important thing is that the institution will now be standing on its own
two feet.
Well Nancy, glad I was able to answer all your question fully and to
put your mind at rest. The future for Regents College is an exciting
one indeed!
Jonathan Whatley
In article <34b4e...@amhnt2.amherst.edu>,
Nancy Slator <nesl...@amherst.edu> wrote:
> No one has raised the question of money. How much were the
> taxpayers of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians
> decide that a program that served so many people from outside
> New York wasn't a good use of tax money?
As excerpted from their state profile:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INSTITUTIONAL FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SOURCE OF REVENUE* 1991 1992 1993 1994
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL CURRENT FUNDS 6,761 8,171 9,780 11,785
TUITION AND FEES 6,692 7,737 9,449 11,347
PRIV GIFTS & CONTRA 14 168 164 281
UNRESTRICTED 7 162 157 137
RESTRICTED 7 6 7 144
OTHER SOURCES 55 266 167 157
TOTAL UNRESTR FUNDS 6,754 8,165 9,773 11,641
TOTAL RESTRICTED FUNDS 7 6 7 144
---------------------------------------------------------------------
* FIGURES REPORTED IN THOUSANDS
NYSED: OFFICE OF INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The other possible revenue categories, covering Government
Appropriations, Government Grants and Contracts, Endowment Income,
Educational Activities, Auxiliary Enterprises, Hospitals, and
Independent Operations, were left blank. The above tally, then,
would seem comprehensive. Nor do they look to be running a deficit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6,591 7,672 9,635 11,282
---------------------------------------------------------------------
although one was recorded in 1989. Prior and 1990 figures weren't
listed. Debt servicing expenditures were not recorded in any year.
Student financial aid is separate but out-of-state students would
not likely be eligible for many state-funded programs!
Jonathan Whatley
io...@interlog.com
Jonathan Whatley
In article <34B52E30...@ix.netcom.com>,
Lawrie Miller <LA...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Regents College is the legitimate successor to Regents college/
> USNYand there will no longer be confusion between it and SUNY.
But the USNY is not going anywhere, is it?
If confusion is really a problem, has that venerable institution
considered changing its own name? Or would SUNY find a new name
to avoid confusion with the ranking USNY?
One other question. Will alumni of USNY Regents be recieving
their transcripts and like documents from the new Regents or from
the USNY which duly granted them and, unless I am missing something
further, will continue to exist?
Jonathan Whatley
io...@interlog.com
DR_WETSCH
user...@webtv.net (Some1) writes: > Since this thread seems to be devolving into a flame-war, I
This is a good point as most of the Regents students come from outside
New York. An yes the BOR/USNY entity is the equivalent of most State
Higher Education Board Systems. It is just that USNY has been around for
a long time (i.e. since 1784). However, students do come to know of the
importance of USNY and as Martin pointed out in his post on the
acceptance of his degree for academic study the academics are well
aware of USNY.
Martin failed to really state this succintly but it is in support of his
point of the loss of pretige. However, the various accrediting agencies
did not have a problem with the transition including BOR/USNY (which is
also a NY accrediting agency) and thus the effect may be mitigated.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes: > In article <692jds$13qc$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
Martin,
MS: *I did not realise that you regarded this rather serious matter as
a "joke." Do you realise that you are probably alone in this?
No joke and don't fool yourself.
---------
*JW:you accuse me of being the attack dog for the College
MS: *I have made no such accusation, but if the collar fits and you are
comfortable wearing it...
Martin, one of your statements was, "Why do [sic] the College leave
leave it to you as Alumni President to defend a decision in which
you presumably had little or no say." In the context of the letter
it was easy to infer. If you just meant that the College should
respond and not leave it to me alone then I think it should have
been stated as such without dragging me into the statement. I guess
my your comments here is that this is what you meant.
---------------
MS: *I did not "slam the representation of the alumni association for
the alumni" and never have. The statement is a non sequetor, for "asking
for some type of full disclosure" by the college cannot possibly be
interpreted as "slamming" the Alumni Association.
It is really hard to grasp what you are trying to say. I guess I am
ignorant. In my comments I explained that almuni concerns were
addressed to the Regents. You clearly attacked this. Consequently,
the alumni association made those representations. So who or what
was your attack against in addressing those concerns.
*MS: Yes, I have asked for disclosure - and, given that you are acting as the
conduit for information from the college, is it unreasonable to ask you?
I never made no such representation other than identifying my affiliation
with the alumni association. You made that inference yourself.
-------
*JW:You know what that representation of the alumni association has
been and what has been presented thus you obviously consider it
inadequate.
MS: *No, I have not said that. What I have said is that I believe that the
reponse from the college has been wholly inadequate.
Martin I did not state that you said this. I said that you should
"know" this.
-----------------
MS: ***Now can the Alumni President stop blowing smoke (as one of my email
correspondents so beautifully put it) and give us some answers?
Well I can go stoke my chimney. Are you now asking me to act as
the "offical conduit" for the College by demanding answers from me.
I am still really trying to figure out what you are actually asking.
Once again, my own ignorance must be showing. Sorry. I see your issues
as negative impact, degree prestige, who awards the degrees, who are
really alumni, why shouldn't Regents be under the state system,
someone must gain from the Regents College transition,
and why is the College secretive. I may have missed a few others in
trying to recap here. But anyway, I have given my answers and not
as the "official conduit" of the College and have done so more than once.
Obviously you are not satisfied.
I am trying to quit bickering over the continous rehash of the same
stuff. But at the same time I do not want you to keep accusing me
of ignoring my critics. In actuality you are not satisifed with
my posts expecting and I am even wondering if you could even agree
to disagree in this forum.
John
DR_WETSCH
io...@interlog.com (Jonathan Whatley) writes: > In article <34B52E30...@ix.netcom.com>,
Yes, the College will be issuing these documents. The College has
indicated that they are using the American Association of
Collegiate Registrars/Admissions Officers (AACRO) recommended
procedures in dealing with transcripts. I believe this means that
the transcript will somehow explain the change. They will also be
issuing USNY diplomas to the USNY graduates,
For members of the Alumni Association out there, a newsletter is
being prepared with some Questions and Answers from the College
to address these type of questions. When published we hope to
get some feedback from you.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
nesl...@amherst.edu writes: > In Article <691t8p$g9s$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
> Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes:
> >In article <691fk6$k24$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
> >DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
> >(a) Who gains from Regents College becoming a private institution?
>
> of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians decide that
> a program that served so many people from outside New York wasn't a
> good use of tax money?
>
> an obvious question to ask.
A good question. I believe it was recognized as an outstanding program
by the Regents (i.e. they did have their name on it). Any money issues
would have been been discussed at their meetings so I don't know if this
was a factor. Possibly?
>
> I had been closely following the plan to start a Regents MALS
> program. I was considering enrolling in a brand new program but
> I'm not interested in a new program at a college without a track
> record, which is how I see the new private Regents.
>
> -- Nancy Slator
As the successor to the USNY program and the Absolute Charter from
the Regents, the Regents perceived the institution as having a track
record. This is how I perceive the College's track record between
USNY/Regents and independent Regents.
Also, USNY/Regents did not have any track record in graduate
study prior to the MALS anyway. I do not believe the MALS program
will be undergoing any changes during the transition and will be put
together with the same quality and by the same people who did it under
USNY/Regents.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
Martin Spillane
>nesl...@amherst.edu writes: > In Article <691t8p$g9s$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
>> Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes:
>>(a) Who gains from Regents College becoming a private institution?
Nancy Slator asks:
>No one has raised the question of money. How much were the taxpayers
>.of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians decide that
>a program that served so many people from outside New York wasn't a
>good use of tax money?I have no idea what the answer to this is -- it just
seems like an obvious question to ask.
*First, according to the people at the College, the college has not been
subsidised by New York taxpayers for many years, and may have even provided
an indirect financial benefit to the State Education Department. This would
appear to be confirmed by Johnathan's posting of the financial summary.
Second, the New York State Education Department (AKA USNY) proposed that at
separation the college should pay $250,000 to New York state for goodwill,
assets, etc. This appears to be chicken feed, given that the college has
retained the brand new building which it purchased a few years ago. The
college resisted the demand for payment, claiming that it would need every
cent to survive in the new commercial environment. In the end, as the dispute
was delaying matters and the $250,000 was a minor consideration, the demand
was dropped and no money changed hands.
Third, had the question been one of subsidies, an in-state and
out-of-state fee structure would have taken care of that.
*The question of who actually benefits from the change to private status
remains unanswered. Certainly it is not the students or alumni.
>I had been closely following the plan to start a Regents MALS
>program. I was considering enrolling in a brand new program but
>I'm not interested in a new program at a college without a track
>record, which is how I see the new private Regents.
*And it is how a great many other people will see it, particularly as the
state would not permit the college to offer it whilst it was within the state
orbit. However this is something to which the college (and the principal
spokesman for the college on this newsgroup) appear to be blind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane
In article <693q1e$28c0$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
.>nesl...@amherst.edu writes: > In Article <691t8p$g9s$1...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
.>> Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Martin Spillane) writes:
.>> >In article <691fk6$k24$1...@newssvr08-int.news.prodigy.com>,
.>> >DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
.>>
.>> >(a) Who gains from Regents College becoming a private institution?
.>>
.>> No one has raised the question of money. How much were the taxpayers
.>> of New York spending on Regents? Did the politicians decide that
.>> a program that served so many people from outside New York wasn't a
.>> good use of tax money?
.>>
*NO TAX DOLLARS WENT INTO THE COLLEGE.
.>> I have no idea what the answer to this is -- it just seems like
.>> an obvious question to ask.
.>
.>A good question. I believe it was recognized as an outstanding program
.>by the Regents (i.e. they did have their name on it).
*A NAME WHICH THEY HAVE NOW TAKEN STEPS TO REMOVE.
.Any money issues
.>would have been been discussed at their meetings so I don't know if this
>was a factor. Possibly?
*SUCH ISSUES SHOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AT THE REGENTS COLLEGE BOARD
OF OVERSEERS MEETING WHICH JOHN WETCH ATTENDED AS PRESIDENT OF THE ALUMNI
ASSOCIATION.
>
.>As the successor to the USNY program and the Absolute Charter from
.>the Regents, the Regents perceived the institution as having a track
.>record. This is how I perceive the College's track record between
.>USNY/Regents and independent Regents.
*THE COLLEGE HAS AN EXCELLENT TRACK RECORD IN THE ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC
CREDIT. IT HAS NO TRACK RECORD IN THE AWARD OF DEGREES AS THIS WAS DONE
BY USNY AND USNY STILL EXISTS.
.>
.>Also, USNY/Regents did not have any track record in graduate
.>study prior to the MALS anyway. I do not believe the MALS program
.>will be undergoing any changes during the transition and will be put
.>together with the same quality and by the same people who did it under
.>USNY/Regents.
*IN OTHER WORDS, ALTHOUGH THE REGENTS WOULD NOT APPROVE IT TO BE AWARDED
AS AS A USNY DEGREE,IT WILL NOW BE AWARDED BY REGENTS COLLEGE WITHOUT ANY
MODIFICATION.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane
In article <693odf$1p8s$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>JW:you accuse me of being the attack dog for the College
>
>comfortable wearing it...
>
JW >Martin, one of your statements was, "Why do [sic] the College leave
>leave it to you as Alumni President to defend a decision in which
>you presumably had little or no say." In the context of the letter
>it was easy to infer. If you just meant that the College should
>respond and not leave it to me alone then I think it should have
>been stated as such without dragging me into the statement. I guess
>my your comments here is that this is what you meant.
*EH? How could I say that the college should not leave it to you without
mentioning you? And when the case is hopeless, is the "attack dog" seen
as being more effective than the 'guard dog'
>
>---------------
>MS: I did not "slam the representation of the alumni association for
>the alumni" and never have. The statement is a non sequetor, for "asking
>for some type of full disclosure" by the college cannot possibly be
>interpreted as "slamming" the Alumni Association.
>
JW >It is really hard to grasp what you are trying to say. I guess I am
>ignorant. In my comments I explained that almuni concerns were
>addressed to the Regents. You clearly attacked this. Consequently,
>the alumni association made those representations. So who or what
>was your attack against in addressing those concerns.
>
>MS: Yes, I have asked for disclosure - and, given that you are acting
as the conduit for information from the college, is it unreasonable to
ask you?
>
JW: >I never made no [?] such representation other than identifying my
/affiliation with the alumni association. You made that inference
/yourself.
*MGS: The conclusion that you are acting as a conduit for the college
authorities was reached by reasonable deduction based on observation.
.>-------
.>
.>JW:You know what that representation of the alumni association has
.>been and what has been presented thus you obviously consider it
.>inadequate.
.>
.>MS: No, I have not said that. What I have said is that I consider the
.response from the college to be inadequate
.>
.>Martin I did not state that you said this. I said that you should
.>"know" this.
*MGS. No I have not criticised the Alumni Association. I do, however
consider the response from the college to be inadequate.
.>-----------------
.>MS: ***Now can the Alumni President stop blowing smoke (as one of my email
.> correspondents so beautifully put it) and give us some answers?
.>
.>
.>Well I can go stoke my chimney. Are you now asking me to act as
.>the "offical conduit" for the College by demanding answers from me.
*MGS: No I am not asking you to do this. You are already doing it and I
am asking that the people in the college public affairs office do the
job they are emplued to do and thus save you 'fronting' for them, for
that is not a proper role for the President of the Alumni association
President.
.>I am still really trying to figure out what you are actually asking.
.>Once again, my own ignorance must be showing. Sorry. I see your issues
.>as negative impact, degree prestige, who awards the degrees, who are
.>really alumni, why shouldn't Regents be under the state system,
.>someone must gain from the Regents College transition,
.>and why is the College secretive. I may have missed a few others in
.>trying to recap here.
*MGS: Except for the "Who are really alumni" which has never even been
mentioned, this is a reasonable summary. The alumni are all graduates of
USNY. To you lis we could add, "What has happened to Bill Steweart (Public
affairs officer for the colege) or his deputy?" They seem to monitor this
newsgroup and but only respond selectively, as when someone complains at
not receiving enrollment information..
*Believe me John, I have no desire to fall out with you, but I hate to
see you and the alumni association being misused in this way. If you
do not have the answers, you obviously can't answer the questions, so
why are you trying to claim to have done so? It does not do anything
for the credibility of the Alumni association, or for the future
credibilty of the college, which is one of the major issues under
discussion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin spillane Spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane
In article <693osu$r0a$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>> their transcripts and like documents from the new Regents or from
>> the USNY which duly granted them and, unless I am missing something
>> further, will continue to exist?
>>
>> Jonathan Whatley
>> io...@interlog.com
>
>Yes, the College will be issuing these documents. The College has
>Collegiate Registrars/Admissions Officers (AACRO) recommended
>procedures in dealing with transcripts. I believe this means that
>the transcript will somehow explain the change. They will also be
>issuing USNY diplomas to the USNY graduates,
I believe that the AACRO recommendations cover the situation where the
college from which the student graduated ceases to exist by reason of
takeover or absorption and the successor institution then takes on the
duty of issuing transcripts, duplicate diplomas, letters of attendance,
etc. If a college goes bankrupt or otherwise ceases to exist, the
academic records are usually transfered to the Registrar of the flagship
state institution, who then provides the service.
In the present case the USNY will continue to exist and could well
continue to issue transcripts and duplicate diplomas. as a matter of
convenience thee is no reason why theu should not ask Regents College to
provide the service, but USNY graduates should be untitle to have their
transcripts issued in the traditional USNY format, rather than in the
newly devised Regents College format.
>For members of the Alumni Association out there, a newsletter is
>being prepared with some Questions and Answers from the College
>to address these type of questions. When published we hope to
>get some feedback from you.
>
As John Wetch, PhD and I both know already, the answers may well provoke
more questions than they answer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JMcAulay
In article <693q1e$28c0$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_WETSCH <DR_W...@Prodigy.Net> wrote:
>I do not believe the MALS program
>will be undergoing any changes during the transition and
will be put
>together with the same quality and by the same people who
did it under
>USNY/Regents.
>
>John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
Hi, Dr. Wetsch:
Perhaps that's a bit too bad; maybe a new degree title might
help. I've spoken to a few people who have shaken their
heads at the idea of the "MALS" as Master of Arts in Liberal
Studies, rather than Master of Arts in Library Science.
Regards,
John
who also wonders if the "New Regents College" will grant
requests for new diplomas from former USNY graduates.
DR_WETSCH
j...@qnet.com (JMcAulay) writes: > In article <693q1e$28c0$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
Hi.
The actual degree awarded will be the MA just as one can earn a
BA or BS in liberal studies through Regents. The program name
is MALS and I have seen other institutions use this program name
for graduate liberal studies programs. The M.L.S. degree is
commonly used for library science so there is some chance for
confusion. To make it more confusing the University of Oklahoma
uses MLS for its program name in liberal studies.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
DR_WETSCH
j...@qnet.com (JMcAulay) writes: > In article <693q1e$28c0$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
> DR_WETSCH <DR_W...@Prodigy.Net> wrote:
>
> Regards,
> John
> who also wonders if the "New Regents College" will grant
> requests for new diplomas from former USNY graduates.
I do not know at this point. This would definitely be a reversal from
wanting to keep the USNY diploma. As a guess, I would think that if the
College is to replicate USNY diplomas to the USNY graduates they may
not allow a trade in from the old grads. But then again, maybe they
will?
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
Martin Spillane
In article <6972sq$5nj0$2...@newssvr09-int.news.prodigy.com>,
DR_W...@Prodigy.Net says...
>
>>j...@qnet.com (JMcAulay) wonders if the "New Regents College" will grant
>
>
>wanting to keep the USNY diploma. As a guess, I would think that if the
>College is to replicate USNY diplomas to the USNY graduates they may
>not allow a trade in from the old grads. But then again, maybe they
>will?
* One wonders how great such demand would be....as you may have gathered,
I for one would not have any desire to trade!
Lawrie Miller
Martin Spillane wrote:
On this general point I conducted a straw poll at work asking a
total of nine people that, if they had to choose, which would they
prefer to appear on their resume:
(a)
a degree from Regents College
(b)
a degree from University of the state of New York
I gave them NO background information on the history of either the
college or USNY.
I made no mention of distance learning.
Some asked why I wanted to know. In such cases I asked that they
"just humor me" and to please answer the question.
The question was delivered verbally, but the choices were
presented on a paper headed "Resume" with an underlined
subheading of "Education".
After they had chosen, I asked a supplementary question
about the reasons for their choice. This question was
delivered verbally.
"you chose (a/b) because"
(i) you know the institution by reputation?
(ii) you think you have heard of the institution?
(iii) Neither of the above.
Those choosing (iii) were asked one further question.
"Then why did you choose (a/b)?"
The sample size was of course small and sample not randomly
selected. I approached people during periods when there was
time for casual conversation and the questions were asked as
matter-of-fatctly as possible (I'm not paid to conduct polls at
work Not a good career move). Would make no claims based
on the outcomes, less still that it proves anything. Nevertheless,
the results are interesting.
I bothered to do this because, although it may seem self evident
to me that a USNY degree has infinitely greater utility than
(in Spillane parlance) a Regents College BLANK degree,
there is no empirical evidence either way. Thus an opening
is presented to those skilled in the use of smoke an mirrors
to confuse and distract.
Utility of any diploma depends upon peoples perception of
the institution that issues it. Preference for one institution
over another is an indicator of the relative worth of their
diplomas in the market place. Decisions to hire or not
hire, promotions, grad school acceptances, are all affected
to varying degrees by these (sometimes unconscious)
preferences. These biases are measurable for any population
by statistical sampling. Utility is thus quantifiable. Those
who hold degrees with high utility are, on average, likely
to do better in a competitive market than those who
hold degrees with less relative utility.
Method clears away the smoke being blown around the
periphery of the argument. It does not matter if USNY
is mistaken for SUNY, or that these are distance learning
degrees, or that Regents College will be standing on its
own two feet. It allows us to focus attention on whether
students are, in effect, being misled when they are told by
Dr Wetsch and the college that the separation will make
no difference to the value of the degrees being offered.
(This of course is not to say that Dr Wetsch or the college
are deceiving people, they may truly believe what they are
saying, but the disservice they do students and alumni is no
less egregious for that.)
We can show that there is evidence that students are likely
to be hurt by this separation or, that there is no evidence
to support this view. We do not have to wait to see what
happens five or ten years down the road.
If we set the null hypothesis as,
"there is no difference in the utility of a Regents College
degree and a University of the State of New York degree",
a questionnaire can be designed, the data gathered and
analyzed, and the whole issue settled once and for all.
Perhaps Dr Wetsch would use some of the resources and
talent available to the Alumni President to prove the case
he has spent so much time and energy defending. This is
one occasion when I would be delighted to be proved
wrong.
Anyway, in the meantime here are the results of the "poll"
I conducted.
Institution to appear on their resume (a) RC (b) USNY
......................................................................................
(a) 0
(b) 9
ALL nine respondents chose USNY
.........................................................
For the supplementary question
You chose (RC or USNY) because
(i) of its reputation
(ii) you think you have heard of it
(iii) Neither
........................................................
(i) 3
Three of the nine said they chose USNY because of its reputation.
(A bit more digging revealed that all three had clearly
confused USNY for SUNY or NYU!)
(ii) 4
Four chose USNY because they thought they had heard of it.
(iii) 2
Two chose neither (i) nor (ii)
(They were sure they never heard of USNY)
These two had chosen USNY because it "sounded better"/
"was more impressive"/ "was a university".
.....................................................................................
Again, I make no claims about this being a representative sample
or that the data prove anything, but a properly conducted survey
WOULD provide proof.
Anyway, regardless of the reasons, NO respondent would choose
to have "Regents College" on their resume in preference to USNY.
All, I would argue, consciously or unconsciously made an assessment
of the relative utility of the degrees (given that the question was framed
to elicit that judgment by presenting it in a resume context) and saw
were their best interests would lie.
DR_WETSCH
I appreiciate Lawrie Miller's post on the utility of the degree.
The Alumni Association is using its resources to gather opinion
from its constituency which is something very important to this
process. Our efforts in doing this have been increasing and we
are addressing our plans to make sure that we are representing
the views of the alumni.
To me the real question is what are the quantifiable aspects. Some
of those remain unchanged such as accreditation and degree flexibility.
John R. Wetsch, Ph.D.
JMcAulay
In article <34B8DE4A...@ix.netcom.com>,
Lawrie Miller <LA...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On this general point I conducted a straw poll at work
asking a
>total of nine people that, if they had to choose, which
would they
>prefer to appear on their resume:
>
>(a)
>a degree from Regents College
>
>(b)
>a degree from University of the state of New York
>
Hi, Lawrie and all:
Why am I not surprised at the results of your poll?
[For those who missed it, the vote was (b) by 9 to 0]
I've said before, and confusion be damned, that while most
people have never heard of the University of the State of
New York, just about everyone anywhere has for damn sure
heard of the State of New York. So there's some sort of
connection to "perceived reality," anyway.
No joke, although it might sound a bit silly, my thought is
that the folks in Albany could do a lot worse than calling
it "Regents College of New York." Or something like that.
Think about it.
Regards to all,
John
who bears malice to none
(except for the _arrogant_ know-it-alls).
RM Isaacs
Hi folks,
Some years ago, while surveying the US distance-learning (DL) field, I
wrote to many traditional colleges, inquiring about DL programs. Many
that did not themselves offer such programs recommended those of the
University of the State of New York. I cannot recall how many
mentioned "Regents College" but I do remember that all referred to the
"University of the State of New York." It was this widespread
recognition by the regionally-accredited traditional sector that was
the most significant factor that led to my enrolling.
Of course, Regents College’s reputation as a highly reputable
institution that specifically served the needs of adult learners did
not then, nor does it now, depend solely on its association with the
state education authority. That reputation was largely gained through
the proven excellence of its programs. What did attract many of its
students, and certainly helped its acceptance by traditional graduate
schools, worldwide, however, was the fact that it was part of the New
York State education system.
Now whichever part of the States you may hail from, or be associated
with, their is no disputing that the New York State education system
is held in wide regard on account of its high standards. That
reputation, no doubt, rubbed off onto Regents College which, in turn,
reciprocated by (at least) maintaining those standards.
It is through no accident that the colleges of the UK’s most
prestigious universities (Oxford and Cambridge) have, despite their
very considerable independence, not sought to dissociate themselves
from the universities. Would Bill Gates and others have offered their
generous donations to colleges that lacked association with the
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge? Would the Oxbridge colleges
attract the applications they do without their association with the
universities? I don’t believe that I need answer those questions for
you.
I know that Regents College is not Harvard and does not attract the
funding that Harvard does, but it does attract large numbers of
applicants. Will those applicants still opt for an independent
Regents College ahead of its strongest competitors? If I was the
President of Thomas Edison or Charter Oak, I’d be regretting that
Regents did not decide to go private years ago.
Ron Isaacs <r...@educ.u-net.com>
Martin Spillane
In article <34B8DE4A...@ix.netcom.com>, (Lawrie
Miller)LA...@ix.netcom.com writes:,
> here are the results of the "poll" I conducted.
>
>Institution to appear on their resume (a) RC (b) USNY
>
>(b) 9 ALL nine respondents chose USNY
>
>(i) of its reputation
>(ii) you think you have heard of it
>(iii) Neither
>........................................................
>(i) 3 Three of the nine said they chose USNY because of its reputation.
>(A bit more digging revealed that all three had clearly confused USNY for
>SUNY or NYU!)
>
>(ii) 4 Four chose USNY because they thought they had heard of it.
>
>These two had chosen USNY because it "sounded better"/"was more
>impressive"/ "was a university".
>or that the data prove anything, but a properly conducted survey
>WOULD provide proof.
>
>Anyway, regardless of the reasons, NO respondent would choose
>to have "Regents College" on their resume in preference to USNY.
>All, I would argue, consciously or unconsciously made an assessment
>of the relative utility of the degrees (given that the question was
.saw were their best interests would lie.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrie Miller has conducted some empirical research which would appear
to be perfectly valid, if 'informal,' and having duly qualified it for
its small scale and lack of randomness, he has announced some very
interesting results.
Its validity is enhanced by having been conducted in the workplace, where
such matters can be of vital importance and where the concerns expressed
are those which will influence future Regents College students. It would
be particulary intersting to replicate the study within the Military and
the Nursing profession, where the Regents College is strongly represented
and also has an excellent student support program.
His results appear to correlate with those which came from research which
I undertook in the UK in 1993/4, with tremendous cooperation from the
staff ofThomas Edison State College NJ and Regents College USNY
(cooperation which might well be forthcoming to John Wetch and the USNY
Alumni Association should Lawrie's suggestion be taken up).
The two colleges supplied me with lists of people who, whilst resident
in Britain and Ireland, had, over the previous TEN years, requested
literature from the colleges. 158 people were on the RC-USNY list and 13
on the TESC, with only two names appearing on both lists. (TESC also had
two large blocks of names of students who had been entered by separate UK
colleges. These were discounted.)
Obviously the early part of the combined list was very stale, but I
traced 51 people, of whom 36 agreed to complete my questionaire. Of these,
one name appeared on the TESC list, one on both and 34 on the RC-USNY
list. Two responded from the USA, one from Hong Kong, one from India,
one from Germany, and one from Indonesia. My follow-up inquiries
indicated that a disinclination to complete the questionaire operation
was usually the result of having been refused academic credit by the
college or not having received either no response, or what had been
perceived as an inadequate response, to an inquiry.
Rather surprisingly, of the 36 respondents, eleven were already
graduates when they obtained the literature, five holding master's
degrees and one a PhD. With one exception, their prior degrees were
from well respected colleges. Four of the eleven had already graduated
from USNY at the time of the survey and two more were still enrolled
and were planning to graduate shortly.
As the number of prior graduates was unexpected, I had not addressed it
in the questionaire. However in validating my survey I spoke to a number
of respondents by telephone and I also met 18 of them at a Luncheon
Seminar for the respondents, which I organised at Birkbeck College,
University of London University. (This was generously funded by Regents
College and hosted by Dr. Paula Peinovich, the Academic Vice-President of
RC-USNY who was in England at the time.)
In the course of those conversations it became apparent that Regents
College was perceived as being a constituent college of the University
of the State of New York, which itself was perceived as being a
federated university along the lines of the University of London, the
University of wales and, for that matter, (as Ron Isaacs points out
elswhere), the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
One respondent had previously graduated from an unacredited US college
and was determined to remedy the matter by getting a gold-plaed degree.
Another, who held a PhD wanted a genuine BS(USNY) to go on his letterhead
to give it an international flavor. Yet another wanted to reside in the
US and felt that the USNY label would make his degree stand out amongst
the dubious degrees which he beieved to be endemic in California.
I was also interested to find out why TESC had received so few individual
inquiries compared with RC-USNY, and my suspicion that this was connected
with 'snobbery' appeared to be confirmed.
In Britain a free-standing college, not forming part of a university, is
regarded as being inferior, and this had clearly influenced some of the
respondents. Whether the same attitude prevails in the more democratic
United States, I can't say, but Larrie's research it certainly looks as
if it does, in which case the distance degree programs of other states
such as that of the University of Minesota or those offered by some
of the campuses of the University of Wisconsin or the Illinois state
universities will start to look very attractive to people who would
previously have enrolled with Regents College.
Certainly that is what Laurie Millers research would appear to indicate.
It would now be very interested to know what the (normally) very
efficient institutional reseach people at Regents College have been
forecasting to their superiors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Spillane spil...@facstaff.wisc.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RM Isaacs
On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 00:34:39 GMT, I wrote, in part:
>
>Now whichever part of the States you may hail from, or be associated
>with, their is no disputing that the New York State education system
>is held in wide regard on account of its high standards.
I did, of course, mean to write *there* and not *their*. I only
noticed the error after I'd posted my little piece. This correction
is simply my way of saying that I'm not really illiterate :-) .
Ron
Lawrie Miller
Lawrie Miller wrote:
I collected some more data from the workplace on this topic
(my last).
From a total of eleven respondents,
to appear on their resume.....
(a) 2
two chose Regents College
(b) 9
nine chose USNY
Of the two choosing RC, one said they knew it by reputation.
The other did not know it by reputation and did not think they had heard
of it, but chose it because it's was better that "New York" did not figure
anywhere on anyone's resume. Could not help but admire that answer.
Of the nine choosing USNY, one said they knew it by reputation. Three
thought they had heard of it and five chose it because it was more
impressive or because it was a university. One thought the fact that
it was a STATE university gave it more credibility.
COMBINING THE TWO SETS OF POLL DATA,
18 of 20 would choose "University of the State of New York"
to appear on their resume in preference to "Regents College".