European International University

[PearsonOTHMQualifi7654]

Thank you PearsonOTHMQualifi7654, reagrding relaying any NACES evals that say "regionally accredited" for ACBPS accredited degrees from EIU-Paris.

And regarding that--isn't it outdated to have foreign credential evaluations say "regional accreditation" after 2020 anyways?  Shouldn't it be more properly designated recognized "institutional" and/or "programmatic" accreditation, since the Dept of Ed here in the US doesn't delineate any longer regional/national/programmatic etc.  Every accreditor is now a "national" accreditor, and either a national "institutional" accreditor, or a national "programmatic" accreditor.  The use of foriegn credential evaluation reports still comparing studies to "regional accreditor", while still generally understood what they mean--are outdated now for 6 years and should be aligned now with the reality of accreditation, and the language used here for evaluators here in the US.  This is why "regional" accreditors can and are accrediting schools outside of their previous "areas" now--everyone is an equal [level] accreditor now per the rules and laws. OK, yes, this is all my opinion, and I am just a commentor here on the internet, but I do believe it warrents consideration.

But my argument above has a point, and it is--why doesn't EIU-Paris sjust eek DEAC accreditation too for definitively recognized institutional accreditation?  DEAC has as its scope global accreditation, and has accredited other distance schools around the world.  EIU-Paris went through the process with ACBSP, I would assume the process would be similar.  Why not?  It can't be that more expensive.  And if they want to not seek accreditation through French RCNP for their programs so they have more "flexibility",  why not DEAC then for recognized "international" accreditation then?  If one is worried about the foreign credential evaluation report saying here in the US that EIU-Paris has the equivalent of "national" accreditation, OK, that would be absolutely true, and nothing wrong with that!  "National Institutional accreditation" to be more accurate, in my opinion under the present regulations in the US.  It is what even a "regional accreditor" should be called too now--all have the same "level" of accreditation now per regulation, rule and law--all equal, all same standing, whether you agree with it or not.  It could be argued in court even ,in my opinion, if one wanted to/had to.  Which accreditors hold more WEIGHT in the minds of acadamia--well, there is of course the argument for that, aand is actually PART of this argument, to be honest (ASIC/ACBSP vs DEAC/ACBSP vs ASIC/ACBSP/DEAC/ATHEA vs DEAC/ATHEA/ASIC/ACBSP vs ???? [RNCP/French Ministry recognition too, perhaps?] and to not acknoweledge that is just plain blind and dishonest (regional accreditors being peceived to be the perpetual "gold standard").  But LEGALLY, all have the same STANDING and LEVEL per law here in the US now--all equal.

So, in my opinion, having DEAC accreditation, and having ATHEA accreditation for the EIU-Paris as an insitution (if ATHEA does obtain ERAQ registration, which would cover most of Europe and other countries that recognize ERAQ), I think would leave less doubts and allow higher portability of the degrees.  I believe specifically that both DEAC and ATHEA accreditations would be acheivable for EIU-Paris.  If they want to keep ASIC UK accreditation, that's fine too it is recognized--but this is the "weight" question now, and is it REALLY fully respected and looked as an internationally recognized, academic accreditor of institutions around the world?  It is a legit accreditor, enough so to be listed by CHEA as an international accrediting body.  But is it "enough"--I myself am not sure.

I myself think EIU-Paris is a legit school, and has academic rigor overall from my own expereinces and research.  They have been very honest, even brutally, in my communications with them, regarding there accreditations, degrees, programs, and requirements.  It is a REAL SCHOOL as far as I myself can see, and on a good path toward more recogniztion, being still so young.  I hope they seek further recognized accreditation.

Sorry for the ramble of thoughts, and any typos in this and previous posts.

Thanks for the input. The reality is that ACBSP programmatic accreditation is arguably a higher achievement than DEAC accreditation. ACBSP being CHEA-recognized pretty much "seals the deal", in the US context. ACBSP (Regional Equivalency, at least programmatically speaking), meanwhile, DEAC is National Equivalency using the old nomenclature. DEAC is US DoE and CHEA-recognized, and ACBSP is arguably a higher recognition than DEAC. ACBSP accreditation in the US context is therefore substantial, and it theoretically crosses the "Regional" threshold right there on its own, although there are more prestigious accreditors for business school programs.

Should they get DEAC? Sure, why not, but at this point, getting DEAC accreditation after achieving ACBSP may be considered a step backward. EIU has a membership with ATHEA, not accreditation, so what additional steps ATHEA may achieve on its own would not make a difference at this point. ATHEA is already well recognized as it is.

From an international perspective, if there are more graduates and data to present to the RNCP to get approval to be listed there, then the European Qualifications Framework (EQF) recognition would become automatic instead of discretionary, despite not being a Diplome Nationeaux.

French universities for certain programs issue Diplôme Universitaire and Diplôme Interuniversitaire, which are not Diplôme Nationaux, and they get accepted and recognized. A French degree doesn't need to be issued as a Diplome Nationeaux for it to be useful.