<p>Why SCAD is not NASAD accredited has always been a bit of a mystery to me. I recently stumbled across an article written in 1992 containing one paragraph that might shed a little light on the topic. </p>
<p>"For example, a former professor, Murray Wilson, and a former student, Mickey Youmans, said Mr. Rowan had them use a concealed microphone to bug and tape-record an accrediting team from the Georgia Department of Education visiting the college in 1986. In an interview, Mrs. Rowan denied that such an incident had taken place."</p>
<p>I have no idea if this is true, nor whether the accrediting body was NASAD or not (accreditation teams are made up of administrators from other colleges), but I found it interesting and possibly indicative that there may have been an issue with NASAD - or accreditation in general - in 1986 that got a little ugly. That said, Mr. Rowan is long gone. I have always maintained it was his ego that caused many of the early problems experienced by the college during its first decade. Keep in mind that this was published in 1992. Times change, and bad reputations take a while to shake.</p>
<p>That's interesting. I've heard rumors about the corrupt administration there, but never anything specific besides the lack of safety. I also wondered why it wasn't accredited, seems like all the other big name art schools are.</p>
<p>//That's interesting. I've heard rumors about the corrupt administration there, but never anything specific besides the lack of safety.//</p>
<p>The campus seems very secure. You can look at the crime stats on their web site. The issue is with the city. Unfortunately, students must interface with the city, but I see plenty of SCAD buses around the clock. And they have bicycle patrols, call boxes. </p>
<p>It is also important to understand that Richard Rowan left the school about 8 years ago and I always thought he was the problem. I still do not know why it is not accredited, but I never experienced any reason why it could not. I posted that excerpt because accreditation is always a point of discussion and interest.</p>
<p>I don't know anything about art schools, but having been involved in accreditation processes of colleges under a different body, I can share what I know. </p>
<p>It's usually a matter of a school meeting or not meeting some hard specific criteria (e.g. X hours offered in X courses, number of faculty who are X, criteria for admissions is X, resources available to students include X, % of X, and ratio of X) and/or a school not bothering to become accredited (not enough gain for the hassle). </p>
<p>Usually you can find the required criteria by the accreditation body (e.g. google NASAD), and can see where a school deviates. That often explains it. </p>
<p>But from my experience, school reputation far outweights accreditation, making it less valuable (if not unvaluable) to those already established. Thus it helps the no-name schools (usually when people boast that their school is accredited, its because no one has ever heard of it), but does little for a school already well established and recognized in their field.</p>
<p>Having reviewed NASAD's and SAC's standards of accreditation, I could never put my finger on what - if anything - was lacking for NASAD. As a student, I didn't experience anything I felt was a problem and that was over ten years ago. Nowadays, I rub elbows with a few profs who complain about this and that (mostly about work loads) but they still get lots of vacation time and some decent perks. </p>
<p>A lot of people blow it out of proportion, but the fact is that the college continues to grow, and place students in well-paying careers. So, something right is happening regardless. In retrospect, it seems that Richard Rowan's ego was always the primary problem, and he's been gone for a good while.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The campus seems very secure. You can look at the crime stats on their web site. The issue is with the city. Unfortunately, students must interface with the city, but I see plenty of SCAD buses around the clock. And they have bicycle patrols, call boxes.
[/quote]
I looked at the statistics. It's cool that the SCAD camus is safe, but if I was a student there I'd like to have to freedom to walk off campus at night without getting worried. </p>
<p>I've been to Savannah. Every store closes at 6 - even CVS - and the streets are empty when the sun sets. Any place where people act like that creeps me out. </p>
<p>I wouldn't apply to any non accredited college because I wouldn't be able to transfer.</p>
<p>Are you sure about the well-paying careers part? I'd be very surprised if any art school placed anybody besides architecture students or something in well paying careers. Art typically doesn't start paying until after a few years or struggle (or a whole lifetime...).</p>
<p>Not being accredited by NASAD doesn't have to do with transferring. I'm transferring from SCAD. They are still accredited regionally (which is what really makes a difference I think?) Other schools will definitely determine credits from SCAD just like any other school.</p>
<p>And SCAD is VERY career-oriented. I'm not sure about the statistics, and obviously, in general, the total that art students make out of college would probably be different than those graduating in more business-y? majors, but SCAD does work hard to put students out in the commercial business world, i would bet it is more career oriented than other 'better' higher-ranked art schools.</p>
<p>RainingAgain notes,"A lot of people blow it out of proportion, but the fact is that the college continues to grow, and place students in well-paying careers"</p>
<p>Response:RainingAgain, imagine how many applicants SCAD would get if they WERE NASAD accredited. It would beef up their admission standards and improve the quality of their students, not to mention attract better qualty faculity. It couldn't hurt them and would certainly remove the one major sticking point that might have dissuaded top applicants from applying.</p>
<p>As both I and you have said before, SCAD had a LOT of "smoke" about unethical problems etc., eight years ago. They certainly should seek the NASAD accreditation in order to help soothe these naysayers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But from my experience, school reputation far outweights accreditation
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But in this case, they go hand in hand. I think SCAD could certainly improve its reputation if it got accredited, because then there wouldn't be all these people sitting around asking why it's not accredited.</p>
<p>This is so interesting. I would not know about this or other schools in the art world. But based on the bits here, without knowing anything about the school in question, my guess would be it is internal politics. </p>
<p>To get accredited means having to make some changes within, and those changes run counter to the self-interest of a particular person or group within the school that has the power to not play along (assuming that accreditation would be worth it to the school as a whole).</p>
<p>larationalist notes,"But in this case, they go hand in hand. I think SCAD could certainly improve its reputation if it got accredited, because then there wouldn't be all these people sitting around asking why it's not accredited."</p>
<p>This is an old post but since I’m a SCAD student who knows a bit about this, SCAD is not accredited by NASAD because there are certain criterias the courses have to fit to be accredited and not all courses SCAD offers fall under those available. It is by choice that SCAD chooses not to be accredited by NASAD BUT it is accredited by SACS (Southern Association of Colleges and Schools)</p>
<p>One stated answer in another forum in 2008 by a certain Taylor Welden said (in exact quotation)</p>
<p>“SCAD did look into NASAD accreditation. NASAD allows public universities to get accreditation for just one school/department within the University. For private schools they require the entire school to get NASAD accreditation. There were other schools (performing arts, painting, graphic, interaction, game development, etc, etc) within SCAD that did not want to do this so the Industrial Design Department was unable.”</p>