Talk:Council for Higher Education Accreditation

message: Mr. Golin,
I appreciate your interest in accuracy, but part of the Wikipedia project is to correct inaccuracies...not just wholesale delete material.  
Given your objections, I have tried to more clearly clarify that the accrediation is not CHEA accreditation, but is rather CHEA recognized accrediation.  I've also tried to more carefully word other items that may be of special concern to a CHEA board member.  
But I submit that the extended discussion of accreditation and CHEA as a "self appointed, self policing" mechanism of colleges, universities and accreditors should be more clearly pointed out.
If you feel a need to correct and clarify, please do so.  But wholesale deletion of materialis inappropriate...especially, in my opinion, because you are a CHEA board member and it could give the appearance that there are points being raised that you don't want to see discussed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.143.31.236 (talk • contribs) 
Dear Wikipedia contributor,
CHEA is not self-appointed; the USDE is, by statute, to identify an authoritative agency to participate in oversight of the U.S. accrediting system. It is CHEA that USDE identifies this way.
I do not mean to have given offense-- it is not my intention to distress you. However, so much of what you wrote was incorrect that the obligation to correct your submission should be yours.
I do not think it is reasonable to name only two members of the CHEA board. Either the chair alone, or the entire board would be better. But also, none of the CHEA administration is named, and this is curious. 
GG—Preceding unsigned comment added by G-gollin (talk • contribs) 21:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed 70.143.31.236's rambling diatribe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Breaklaugh99 (talk • contribs) 1 July 2007
What evidence is there that CHEA Board members are not self-appointing? All appointments arise from the membership, but it is unclear if appointments to the Board are "Board-only" (i.e., self-appointment). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board-only
It would be better to discuss existing by-laws for Board appointments, and provide links rather than to simply say CHEA is or is not (this or that). Gsmcghee (talk) 21:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm... Let's consider this particular conversation to be closed. This started nearly 3 years ago over what appears to have been an allegation that CHEA is the self-appointed overseer of the U.S. accreditation process. The article says nothing about how board members are appointed -- and that's not a detail that would normally be found in an encyclopedia article. There's not much to discuss here... --Orlady (talk) 23:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: A newly registered user who seems to have some grievances against CHEA and U.S. accreditation of higher education has been actively engaged in revising the article (edit warring) to attack CHEA and Wikipedia for a number of perceived sins. I have numerous concerns about this user's edits. My concerns start with the lead sentence, which was revised to eliminate that straightforward and well-sourced information that "the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is a United States organization of degree-granting colleges and universities" (a statement of the basic nature of the organization, consistent with Wikipedia guidance on the lead section) and replaced it with the less informative "The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is a private organization located in the United States that maintains professional connections with degree-granting colleges and universities", which denies the fact that it is an organization of universities and may be intended to imply a dark conspiracy. --Orlady (talk) 17:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourcing, encyclopedic style, neutral point of view, etc.

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100525040227/http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/22/f4/c7.pdf to http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/22/f4/c7.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This entire article is written in a very bizarre way. From someone who has never heard of CHEA and has no outside perspective of how accreditation works in the US and who oversees it, this article is written - very clearly, in my perspective - in a way that tries repeatedly to almost propogandize CHEA's legitimacy, in a way that truly legitimate organization Wiki pages are not written. I don't know what's going on in this article or on this talk page but this wiki page has me walking away less convinced that CHEA is a legitimate organization and more concerned that it is a private lobbying group of some sort. Additionally, many of the sources are either CHEA itself, or the international agency who serves to verify CHEA and its European counterpart. That doesn't seem very legitimate, and it makes it even more confusing that the entire viewpoint section is against "European-style" college systems. In fact, the view points page makes it even more clear that this is more of a lobbying or special-interest group than a legitimate "agency" for higher education. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.176.9.254 (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Not neutral

message: Agrees with the earlier writer in saying that some of claims needs to be verified, but at the same point of time, it is not reason enough to defame and say libellous things about the CHEA (Council for Higher Education Accreditation). They seem to have good presence all around. yes, the article needs to have more references and needs to be re written in a much more proper manner with subtler tone. (Themisislegal (talk) 09:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Seems to be balanced and ok, but needs to be modified

message: I addressed some issues with an edit; they can be seen in the article. The book referenced by Harlan G. Bloland is used several times in citation. While I see no evidence thus far that he was ever directly involved in CHEA, it would be good to have more sources rather than one that is returned to repeatedly, especially one in which he was present during board meetings. Also, the reference to "helping the public" regarding understanding accreditation is a misleading, somewhat strange statement - how many of the public have been helped to understand accreditation? How does one determine this? - and the citation merely leads back to CHEA's website anyway. The same issue arises with the sentence on "European-style" education, which is a statement that is so vague, that it seems intentionally so, and again, is simply backed up with a link to the organization's website.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genevieve de la Voie Moyenne (talk • contribs) 04:04, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some clarifications on sources and sentences