Guest guest Posted May 20, 2006 Report Share Posted May 20, 2006 ACCREDITATION & USDE Under the US Constitution, the states did not grant the federal government the right to regulate education, which is why 90% of public education is funded by states, and why that funding generally accounts for >50% of state budgets. The federal government, however, inserts itself in the standards process by imposing regulations that states or schools that are tied to federal funding. For example, K-12 schools have the choice NOT to adopt the " No Child Left Behind " standards, but then they would NOT receive the 8% of their budget that typically comes from the federal government. The USDE is similarly NOT authorized to regulate post-secondary education, and does NOT accredit colleges directly. Instead, they require that a school be accredited by a " recognized " private accrediting organization in order for students at a college to qualify for federal student loan guarantees, or for the school to qualify for federal research grant funding. Any private organization can be " recognized " by the USDE, if they meet certain standards. There is nothing sinister about having a second accreditation agency for AOM, especially given the diversity of opinion about the future of AOM in the US. Partial, or " candidacy " accreditation means that a program curriculum, facilities, faculty, etc, appear to be in order, but annual progress reports ( " self studies " ), correction of minor deficiencies, and evidence of stability must be provided prior to full accreditation status. " Candidacy " accreditation is a probationary period usually two years before full accreditation is granted. One possible scenario for the future of AOM in the US is that NOMAA will be " recognized " by the USDE to accredit entry-level OMD programs for the profession, either this June, or within another year. Thereafter, NOMAA-accredited programs will qualify for student loan guarantees, etc. After some years, and when enough schools offer NOMAA-accredited OMD programs, some states will adopt that as an entry-level standard, particularly those where there is a full scope of practice of AOM. Older practitioners will continue to be licensed, but will not be able to use the " doctor " title, and will eventually be replaced by younger, better-trained, and better-titled colleagues. Some states will continue to use the ACAOM masters degree as entry-level standard for some time, especially those with limited scopes of practice, such as acupuncture-only, prohibited from diagnosing, or treatment by physician referral only. The ACAOM DAOM should flourish as a transitional doctoral program for masters graduates and possibly as legitimate specialty training programs. Brian yehuda frischman wrote: >Legally, what does DoE accreditation mean? Does that mean that one who completes a program is legally not allowed to use the title Doctor before DoE approval is actually received? What is the meaning of partial accreditation? Is that analogous to produce which is " transitionally " organic--not certified, yet in fact organic, just lacking the number of years needed for certification? And what is expected to happen with NOMAA's hearing in June? What are the likely scenarios? Can a new agency come along and offer the same prestige of accreditation and valid degree of one which has existed for years > > Could someone please clarify these questions for me? > > Thanks > > Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac. > >Valerie Hobbs <valeriehobbs@m > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2006 Report Share Posted May 21, 2006 Brian, I find the NOMAA an odd duckling as they have not yet regulated anyone. They have granted a conditional candidacy for South Baylo recently but that is one program over a very short period of time and now there are problems at SBU over accreditation. My understanding was that an accrediting agency needed to show that they have been doing this for some time and with more then one program. I like the idea of an entry level doctorate but have found the NOMAA not to represent professionals nor have they sought our opinions or full transparency. They have an interesting agenda that appears to tell exactly what a program will teach (some biomedical model of channels) that does not have the consensus with a majority of the profession. It sounds a bit too oppressive for me. MB : acudoc: Sat, 20 May 2006 14:40:58 -0700Re: AccreditationACCREDITATION & USDEUnder the US Constitution, the states did not grant the federal government the right to regulate education, which is why 90% of public education is funded by states, and why that funding generally accounts for >50% of state budgets. The federal government, however, inserts itself in the standards process by imposing regulations that states or schools that are tied to federal funding. For example, K-12 schools have the choice NOT to adopt the " No Child Left Behind " standards, but then they would NOT receive the 8% of their budget that typically comes from the federal government.The USDE is similarly NOT authorized to regulate post-secondary education, and does NOT accredit colleges directly. Instead, they require that a school be accredited by a " recognized " private accrediting organization in order for students at a college to qualify for federal student loan guarantees, or for the school to qualify for federal research grant funding.Any private organization can be " recognized " by the USDE, if they meet certain standards. There is nothing sinister about having a second accreditation agency for AOM, especially given the diversity of opinion about the future of AOM in the US.Partial, or " candidacy " accreditation means that a program curriculum, facilities, faculty, etc, appear to be in order, but annual progress reports ( " self studies " ), correction of minor deficiencies, and evidence of stability must be provided prior to full accreditation status. " Candidacy " accreditation is a probationary period usually two years before full accreditation is granted.One possible scenario for the future of AOM in the US is that NOMAA will be " recognized " by the USDE to accredit entry-level OMD programs for the profession, either this June, or within another year. Thereafter, NOMAA-accredited programs will qualify for student loan guarantees, etc. After some years, and when enough schools offer NOMAA-accredited OMD programs, some states will adopt that as an entry-level standard, particularly those where there is a full scope of practice of AOM. Older practitioners will continue to be licensed, but will not be able to use the " doctor " title, and will eventually be replaced by younger, better-trained, and better-titled colleagues.Some states will continue to use the ACAOM masters degree as entry-level standard for some time, especially those with limited scopes of practice, such as acupuncture-only, prohibited from diagnosing, or treatment by physician referral only. The ACAOM DAOM should flourish as a transitional doctoral program for masters graduates and possibly as legitimate specialty training programs.Brianyehuda frischman wrote:>Legally, what does DoE accreditation mean? Does that mean that one who completes a program is legally not allowed to use the title Doctor before DoE approval is actually received? What is the meaning of partial accreditation? Is that analogous to produce which is " transitionally " organic--not certified, yet in fact organic, just lacking the number of years needed for certification? And what is expected to happen with NOMAA's hearing in June? What are the likely scenarios? Can a new agency come along and offer the same prestige of accreditation and valid degree of one which has existed for years >> Could someone please clarify these questions for me?> > Thanks> > Yehuda Frischman, L.Ac.>>Valerie Hobbs <valeriehobbs@m>Subscribe to the new FREE online journal for TCM at Chinese Medicine Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com Download the all new TCM Forum Toolbar, click, http://toolbar.thebizplace.com/LandingPage.aspx/CT145145To change your email delivery settings, click, and adjust accordingly. Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside the group requires prior permission from the author.Please consider the environment and only print this message if absolutely necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.