Discovering the truth

I must say that in my spare time, I have learnt a lot on this issue of degrees. I must say that this forum did challenge me to learn many of these things..

The whole issue of degree based on PLA etc as been really clouded by those who really profess to using this method which now I realize is not true. Here is what I have learnt and believe..

1. 90% or more of the schools claiming to offer degrees by so-called life experience are not really doing that. That industry seem to be based on fake assertions in many ways.

2. The two main things I think wrong with these schools are, they have no qualified faculty (at least if they do, then ethics becomes an issue) and they do not validate/verify what would make the person qualified.. This means money is 100% and not education.

3. I do believe that experience can be used to grant degrees but it means real respectable validation of the experience. The French VAE process seem to be a very good place to start. But then people can use that as cover to make money.

4. I have no statistics to prove this, but I believe most people that use these universities are caught with a scam especially in the case of St. Regis etc.. How would one know that they were not accredited for real?

5. As I have said many times, people on this forum in general seem to focus on the wrong thing. They try to kill the concept of experience type credit and not based on saying these schools are just fraud up front..

It seem to be a difficult balancing act here..

 

Without meaning to speak for anyone else, I'd say that this point is the critical one. I'd don't think anyone on this forum has tried "to kill the concept of experience type credit." After all, some on this forum have also been accused of unconditionally promoting the "big three" universities that use this method as a major means of earning credits. The conflict comes from a lack of transparency in the evaluation process. If a university awards credits for experience and can not or will not provide a detailed description as to the process by which the experience was evaluated and detailing as well the formula that is employed in translating that experience into credits, then that university will become suspect. If, on the other hand, this process is clear, open to examination, consistent and actually reflects the acquisition of academic knowledge then I do not believe that there would be serious objections on this forum. If you have information to the contrary perhaps you'll state it clearly. If you believe a specific university (or universities) has been maligned then perhaps you'll name that school and detail your objections.
Jack

 

I am not trying to attack the forum itself or anyone. Just saying that at least I have been confused when the focus seem to be on experience based credit. In the end the main problem is that schools like St. Regis, Belford, Almeda and many others do not really evaluate a persons experience. Its more like a scapegoat for them to sell degrees.

Thats main aspect of my argument..

 

Yes, you're right. Many, many of these schools do not really evaluate a persons experience. Or, they evaluate the experience but the standards they use to award credits based on this experience are WAYWAY out of line. For example, a guy spends five years changing tires at a Goodyear shop and earns a Bachelors degree in Automotive Engineering? Scenarios like this are commonplace with some schools. There's no question what category these schools occupy. Again, none of these ideas are new or unusual (I think) and so I'm not sure I understand your objections. Perhaps the situation is this:
A member posts a question, "What do you think about XYZ University?" Immediately a string of replies say, "This school is fraudulent, stay away!" You may not have heard of this school before and so you say to yourself, "Hmmm, I wonder if maybe these people are jumping to conclusions?" The reality is that this school has previously been researched by these responding members, there has been some substantial information gathered, and the conclusion (degree mill) is far from being a hasty one. People don't feel the need to re-research every school that comes up in question. If it was a mill in 2003 then it's a mill in 2004. (That's my opinion, anyway)
Jack

 

Again my point may come down to ethical standards more than anything else. I do not think any respectable person would award a degree to someone without really researching that they have the correct level of expertise and knowledge.. Thats why I said, money is 100% the motivation in most cases..

Here is what I am saying, Awarding credit for experience is not the real issue, it is the cloud of using it is the problem.. So instead of saying, I can sell you a degree just like that, I just add with life experience you can have it.. Its more like trying to cover the real approach. We know the school does not really have Professors reviewing your details at all.

I was honestly fooled by St. Regis and get the impression they were just been harassed, but now I realize they are even worst than some of the others without accreditation. But again, if the discussions I saw was mostly along the line that they were simply not honest, I would have probably seen the real issue. I was noticing people focus on saying you can't get a degree from experience which was not the issue with St. Regis..

 

As i have mentioned elsewhere
every university features prior learning credit provisions
Every one, bar none.
One doesn't really need cannibal island or France or unaccredited outfits to cater to this need.
I have attended a few universities and all had a say about prior learning, work esperience etc etc.
Whether or not the procedure would be "fair" to mr.X private case or mr.Y private category, i have no idea.
However, the procedure was in place.
Oftentimes, it all pertained to how many credits PLAR could account for, given the pursued degree.
no traditional university i know of would award a full fledged degree only on the basis of PLAR.
They might waive 50, 60 or even 80% credits, but still some prior education would be required and some coursework also.

that's why degree mills are in business, after all.

There is no question PLAR provisions are in place everywhere.
They do NOT automatically translate into a degree.
Then degree mills come to fill in the gaps.

 

I honestly do believe that with a credit based system is very difficult for someone to get a degree by experience only. The person with some college and experience maybe fine to some extent..

My issue is not wether you can get credit for PLAR but more to say that the claims themselves are not true.. In other words the diploma mills do not sit down and make sure Joe Doe is competent or know what he says he does.

We have to acknowledge that in other countries there are systems in place to get a degree or professional title by validating experience. The one that jumps to mind now is France with VAE, but if you look at the procedures not many people could question this..

 

make sure Joe Doe is competent or know what he says he does.

I have had a closer look at the french VAE procedure because of another thread.
As far as i understand ( and i am fluent in french ), it is just the good old PLAR provision rewritten & pompously reworded.
It all takes place at a state university through committees or nationwide Paris commissions in some cases.
Not different from Italy.

make sure Joe Doe is competent or know what he says he does.

This question is being well addressed by many institution under the "challenge for credit" option.
If one thinks he's proficient enough in X, then he may sit the comprehensive exam & see.

Credit transfer and/or PLAR + challege for credit may actually account for 80%+ of credit required for a degree.
However, no traditional university will really grant degrees on a portfolio basis alone.

As well, i think it's nearly impossible to determine the competence & proficiency of an individual in these terms.

 

I really do not care what process is used really wether its PLA or VAE etc.. Two points I am trying to make here..

1. The main schools that claim to use PLA in general, do not really do that. In other words, its just used as a cover to sell the degree. They do not really get letters from employers, transcripts etc.. Some mention but most times its not a definite requirment. So they are taking a good concept and making it have a bad name..

2. I do believe you can grant a degree based on competence once proven. My point was that the VAE seeks to address that as a body of knowledge as oppose to how many credits the person earned. Common sense does say that there are persons who could get a degree based on demonstrated competence..

The main issue in this is whether the person is made to prove their abilities and if the faculty is qualified to make that judgement..

In the US, a good example is the famous INS 3 for 1 system which is used to qualify for H-1B visas.. Most diploma mills do not even use this approach or at least if they actually say, they do not really follow the book..

The point I was pointing to is using the concept for fraud..

 

Hi Morleyl: Good posts! Sometimes these issues take a while to sort through. They did for me, at any rate. The unethical stuff usually just falls apart logically if you give it long enough and keep on questioning the sales pitch.

 

well, that's true PLAR is one of the most (ab)used trojan horses when it comes to degree mills.
And i think everybody knows why.
It is obvious there is no way to assess one's ability in a strictly PLAR framework.
That's why the only working versions of PLAR require commitees sitting at state universities to perform what looks like a "challenge for credit"/credit transfer procedure.
and that's why every traditional university has its own challenge-for-credit & PLAR provisions, which may vary consistently.

Is it also apparent why degree mills use THAT trojan horse: because there simply is no comparison whatsoever.
Some traditional universities require ex a minimum of X years of senior level responsibility in a framed working environment ( ex KPMG, IBM, Walmart ) + Y credits.
For some N years X 2 or /2 might be the rule.
In some instances, army time may be an advantage; in other cases it won't.

While with traditional exams, you actually COULD establish a comparison, ex "policy making in central & eastern europe " at State university of Milan VS McGill.

These muddy waters are ideal for the "fortnight doctor" scene.

 

Hi Ham:

I see your point. Thats why maybe the French (VAE) has an advantage, of setting a national standard or approach to ensure that people can't abuse the system.

If for example there was a general approach here that recommends the practice with some standard procedure then you would essential kill the diploma mill business.. Why would someone work with a diploma mill when can get a legitimate degree from a real school?

It all comes down how this is defined by each jurisdiction..