Talk:California Southern University/Archive 1

Archive 1

What we do Know: WASC Regional Accreditation and in candidacy for ACBSP business accreditation"

Evidence directly from the WASC accreditation site shows that Cal Southern is a WASC regionally accrediated school as of 6/2015: http://www.wascsenior.org/institutions/california-southern-university

Evidence directly from the ACBSP accrediation site shows that Cal Southern is also in candidacy for ACBSP business accreditation: http://www.acbsp.org/?page=membership_list — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.109.12 (talk) 20:03, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

What we don't know about "Cal Southern University"

It looks like it's time for a discussion (in lieu of an edit war) of the issue of what this article should report regarding the "Cal Southern University" that the states of Texas and Oregon both say is unaccredited and/or unauthorized, is not a California institution, and is based in Niue.

I believe that the article should not say "This is a different institution that is not related to California Southern University in Santa Ana," because I am not aware of any reliably sourced information to support that statement. Furthermore, I know of no reliably sourced information that connects this "Cal Southern" to California Southern University. Accordingly, it makes sense to me for the article simply to report what these authorities report regarding a "Cal Southern University". As written, the text suggests to me that this is probably a different school, but the article does not say that.

I also believe the article should not say "There is no available information to indicate whether or not this institution is still in operation." When I deleted that sentence, my edit summary said "No point in listing the many things we don't know", but on reflection I think that this sentence probably is original research, since it implies three things we don't actually know: (1) that Cal Southern is or was a different institution (we have sourced information on that), (2) that Cal Southern "operated" at one time or another (we actually have almost no information on what Cal Southern is or what it did), and (3) that there is some basis for speculating that Cal Southern might have closed. Speculation of this nature does not belong in an encyclopedia article.

There are many things we don't know about Cal Southern University, so it's important to limit the article to reporting of reliably sourced information. --Orlady (talk) 20:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

New information about "Cal Southern University"

The Texas Higher Education Coordination Board has updated their webpage titled: “Fraudulent or Substandard Institutions with a Texas Connection” in regards to “Cal Southern University”. It now reads, “No degree-granting authority from the CB & no accreditation from a CB recognized accreditor. It claims to be located in the Caribbean. Not to be confused with the unaccredited but California State approved California Southern University in Santa Anna, California known prior to October 2007 as Southern California University for Professional Studies or the regionally accredited University of Southern California in Los Angeles, California.”

We now have WP:RS information stating the two schools are not the same; therefore, the section regarding “Cal Southern” can be removed. If someone feels that this topic is of encyclopedia value then consider making a new page for it with the disclaimer at the top, “Not to be confused with California Southern University, Santa Ana, the University of Southern California, or California Southern Law School (Riverside, California).”

--Roguephoenix (talk) 13:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Unaccredited degree utility

An anon keeps deleting properly sourced information that I believe is notable in the article. One reason given in the edit comment for the deletions was "This page is for information on CalSouthern university specifically, and already links to a page that explains what an unaccredited degree is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unaccredited". I disagree that notable information should not be included in the article simply because the information is available elsewhere. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

An anon removed the information again with the following edit comment. "Posting this information makes as much sense as posting a list of all the states and countries where a state approved degree is valid and accepted. It is generic info, not university specific". Your analogy fails in my opinion. Although I would be very interested in such a list but don't believe that it is reasonably possible. The issue in my opinion is notability. Accreditation is not very well understood because almost all schools that people are generally familar with are accredited. People therefore frequently jump to false conclusions like "all schools are accredited" or "all degrees will have similar utility if the degrees are in the same major". Therefore listing some of the jurisdictions where CSU degree use may be restricted or illegal is notable information. We are giving information that applies to CSU degrees. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

California Southern University is a California State Approved institution fully authorized to operate in the state of California since 1978 with many doctoral graduates licensed, and practicing successfully in other sates (see: http://www.calsouthern.edu/Academics/Alumni.aspx?dept=psy). Certain states such as the state of Oregon have specifically approved CalSouthern's doctoral degree (see:http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.aspx). The referenced websites that discuss the possibility of unaccredited degree titles being illegal also make allowances for State licensed schools such as CalSouthern (see: http://www.ed.gov/students/prep/college/diplomamills/accreditation.html). There is no information available to indicate that any state has found the use of a CalSouthern degree title 'illegal', thus the referencing of information that for the most part is referring to Diploma Mills is unnecessary and extreme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cognitovincet (talk • contribs) 17:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

California approval is not academic accreditation. There are many people successfully claiming degrees from schools that they never attended or successfully using degrees from pure diploma mills. That doesn't mean that there aren't any utility problems with those kind of degree claims. CSU degrees are unaccredited and therefore have utility issues associated with unaccredited degrees. It is still something that can cause utility problems. The ODA specifically states that only the CSU psychology degree is valid in Oregon. Which would seem to indicate that the other degrees would probably be illegal in Oregon. Until recently even DETC accredited degrees were illegal in Texas. You think that California Southern University unaccredited degrees would likely be legal in Texas? I think the section should be restored. But let's see if there are other opinions. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 21:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your comment: "The ODA specifically states that only the CSU psychology degree is valid in Oregon. Which would seem to indicate that the other degrees would probably be illegal in Oregon."

It is my opinion that this statement is speculative and has no basis in verifiable fact. Nowhere on the page does it state that the use of any other Calsouthern degree title or degree is "illegal". The only referencable statement is stating the approval of the Psych. doctorate degree, which would most likely enable the holder to become licensed in that state. I would assume that a formal submission for approval would have to be submitted to the ODA with an official response issued for each degree to be able to make the statement that use of any other degree is indeed "illegal" in that state.

It seems that there is much eagerness to post sweeping information regarding the use of "illegal degrees", which while valid and very important, does not specifically relate to CalSouthern and thus need not take up the largest portion of the school's page.

The school offers only two degrees that offer the "Dr." title. The DBA and the PsyD and to date there has not been any information provided that validates the statement that the use of either of those degree titles by any out-of-state students has been proven to be "illegal". In fact it appears that there are many more graduates who have successfully used the degree titles in their respective states legally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cognitovincet (talk • contribs) 00:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Your speculation that if someone applied for CSU DBA approval with the ODA then it might be approved is possibly true. The fact remains that the ODA site says that only the PsyD is approved.

Under the title on the ODA website: "Degrees from these unaccredited colleges are approved by ODA for use in Oregon."

It says, "Psychology PhD only" on the CSU row.

What else do you think that could possibly mean?

It is also an accepted fact that CSU is currently unaccredited. It is also a fact that the mentioned jurisdictions restrict the use or make the use of unaccredited degrees illegal. For example, read the THECB website. It seems very clear to me. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 01:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

THECB website says:

1. 1. "Fraudulent or substandard degree" means
   2. a degree conferred in Texas in violation of the Texas Education Code;
   3. conferred in another state in violation of that state's laws;
   4. conferred in another state by an institution that was not accredited by an accreditor recognized by the Coordinating Board and that has not been approved by the Coordinating Board for its degrees to be used in Texas;
   5. or conferred outside the United States by an institution that the Coordinating Board determines is not the equivalent of an accredited or authorized degree.

Number 4 is the category that CSU falls in. That means that by legal definition it is a number 1 in Texas and that means it is illegal to use the degree in Texas. TallMagic (talk) 01:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's my personal opinion, I don't consider CSU a diploma mill. I hope that CSU becomes DETC accredited. In the meantime, CSU is unaccredited. It may never become accredited. As an unaccredited institution the degrees will suffer some utility problems. That should be an important part of the Wikipedia article on CSU. TallMagic (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The Oregon site now states: All degrees issued by DETC-accredited successor California Southern University are valid in Oregon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cognitovincet (talk • contribs) 20:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

In the Process of Obtaining Accreditation

Can we mention that the school is already in the process of obtaining accreditation? – Shannon Rose (talk) 18:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it can be mentioned that way, i.e., "in the process of obtaining accreditation". My opinion is that it can be mentioned that California Southern is on the DETC list of institutions that have applied for accreditation. In my opinion, any such statement should also be tempered with some of the DETC cautionary information that's on the same web page. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I will take heed of that. Nevertheless, please be aware that according to the DETC website "as of October 1, 2008, the name of an initial applicant will not be published in DETC’s publications or posted on DETC’s web site until after it has completed a successful Readiness Assessment." CalSouthern is posted there because it has already been assessed as "Ready." Meaning to say, the accreditation is just a matter of time (actually, they already know when). Prior to October 2008, all applicants were displayed regardless of whether they have a shot at receiving accreditation or not, but from October onwards this practice has been changed. – Shannon Rose (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand. I added a paragraph to the article. Please feel free to improve, spindle, mutilate, delete, etc. :-) Regards, TallMagic (talk) 00:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks. I have nothing to add, looks good as it is. – Shannon Rose (talk) 13:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

California Southern University in CA is NOT the same as Cal Southern University in TX!

California Southern University is a California approved school, whereas, Cal Southern University is a diploma mill based in Texas! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.218.151 (talk) 13:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Apparently received DETC Accreditation

According to the CalSouthern website, DETC has accredited CalSouthern. This is great news but a self-published assertion CANNOT be used on Wikipedia if it involves another party, DETC in this case. My understanding of Wikipedia policy is that we will have to wait until DETC publishes this before it can be added to the article. Thank you, TallMagic (talk) 01:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The report from the last DETC Commission Meeting can now be viewed here: http://www.detc.org/downloads/publications/No.%203%20-%20Report%20from%20the%20Accrediting%20Commission.pdf California Southern is listed under the list: "Six Institutions Gain Initial Accreditation" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cognitovincet (talk • contribs) 19:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The California Southern listing can also be found here: http://www.detc.org/school_details.php?id=303 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cognitovincet (talk • contribs) 22:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I added that to the article yesterday. TallMagic (talk) 04:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Recent IP edits and reversions

This edit [1] is the latest in a series by IP editor/s who seek to add promotional material to the article. As per the edit summaries, the material has several problems: 1. the addition of departments is duplicative; 2. the redlinked names added are not notable WP:WTAF; 3. the names lack WP:RS in that the references provided are WP:SPS; 4. along the same lines, the material violates WP:NOTPROMOTION.--S. Rich (talk) 18:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Full Logo

The logo featured here is only part of the complete logo, which is a full circle with school motto and founding date. This version only shows half of it, which is used as a design for the website. I have a copy of the logo that actually appears in the degree certificates, and it is also available from a PDF file in the website. Now, I am not sure about the legality of posting that one as it is somewhat burried within the site. – Shannon Rose (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)