KWU, From Diploma Mill to unaccredited

At 12:30 AM in my nation time, I verify the ODA inventory, and Dr. Contreras altered the arrangement of Kennedy Western from Diploma Mill to unaccredited.

Any suggestion why?

 

Perhaps because that what it is!

 

I don't think so

 

Here is the description of KWU on the unaccredited illegal to use list now:

So, with all of this big hype about KWU taking on the ODA, the result is the changing of diploma mill to unaccredited. KWU's degrees are still illegal to use in Oregon, KWU still cannot accept students from Oregon, and nothing was gained for the students or alumni listed in the original complaint. The links in the above description still gives KWU a black eye if a someone reads the ODA's website to check out KWU. Exactly, what I expected.

Again, if the objective was to take down or change the ODA then why ask for a settlement? If the objective was to become legal in Oregon why not pay the $250 for the approval process?

I think we know why.

 

"… [W]hy not pay the $250 for the approval process?"

Possibly, because the Administrative Judge and adjudicator, (ODA office) is contaminated; furthermore, if he (ODA office) is contaminated, that not guarantees a Due Process in the Administrative Forum to the Juridical Person.

 

Alan Contreras told us a couple of months ago that he was going to be reorganizing the ODA lists. As you may recall, he asked us for comments on that.

Well, it seems that Alan has combined his degree-mill and non-accredited lists under the heading of 'Invalid Degrees in Oregon'. Then he adds additional annotations on some of the entries.

I think that the changes are a definite improvement. By dividing the old lists between mills and non-accredited, the ODA kind of created the impression that it was endorsing the non-accredited category. Certainly some of these schools' proponents here on Degreeinfo were making that argument: 'OK we knew it wasn't accredited, but the ODA is verifying that it's legitimate.' I remember opining at the time that the ODA shouldn't let people turn it into a weird quasi-accreditor of non-accredited schools.

Here's the new OR-list:

http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html

 

The simple straight forward (and I dare say even obvious) answer is that KWU is such a pathetic representative of an institution of learning that it would fall miserably. It is the obvious answer because KWU degrees are woefully substandard and well below what the normally accepted work is for degrees. Adding more fuel to the damnation of this degree mill, evidence indicates that KWU does not rigorously validate applicant's claims and also that KWU doesn't even follow the lax rules and policies that they have published.

You are grasping at straws, Dr. Latin Juris. May I suggest that you listen to the Senate committee testimony that plainly exposes KWU as a diploma mill?

 

Then Oregon and the good Dr. C. obvious disagree with you!

 

I think "Dr. C" understands exactly what K-W is. That is why he links to the testimony that describes K-W as a degree mill.

 

I am still having much difficulties understanding the procedures to accomplish the purpose that the ODA is pursuing. My first choice is that if the purpose is to ascertain that only degrees from accredited or approved, unaccredited colleges are allowed for use in OR, then, the requirements should be stated simply so. This choice is a very easy one.

The second choice is that if the purpose is to ascertain approved unaccredited or milled colleges that can be used in OR, then, the ODA should identify such colleges (as it is presently done) and also, list all other unaccredited or milled colleges by name only and without the unnecessary emphasis (degree mill, not a degree mill, appears to be ...., does not appear to be...., etc., etc.) that the ODA currently uses. The burden should be upon the colleges to show evidence why their degrees should be approved for use in OR.

I kind like the first choice. To me, it seems very straightforward. It is based upon the premise that any degrees used in OR should be accredited by a recognized accreditor or approved by the ODA. Then, the ODA site should identify the approved unaccredited colleges and also, provide a link to the CHEA web site for users to find/see accredited colleges.

Nevertheless, I applaud what Mr. Contreras has accomplished. There are no easy way out. You are doomed if you do and you are dommed if you don't.

More grease to your elbow, Mr. Contreras. Thank you.

 

To try and save face...

 

Hmmm. He clearly believes it to be a Degree Mill or he would not have had the comment in the first place. Now K-W has settled a case for removing one comment? And yet, it still is being shown as a Degree Mill on the ODA site. Seems like Alan got the better part of that trade.

 

I guess it all comes down to one's definition of a 'diploma mill'. I tend to think of a mill in terms of an institution that sells degrees for no or little work. I am not sure that K-W is in that category. But if K-W or their likes disappear off the face of the earth tomorrow, I wouldn't lose any sleep.

I am also not sure how or who decides which institutions have substandard work and which ones don't.

My opinion is to stay away from ALL unaccredited schools, then there is NO question about one's credentials.

Why does anyone want to pay out their good money and time for what may be a credible course of study and still have to justify their alma mater for the rest of your life. Much easier to put in the hard yards, get a good degree and get on with life.

 

I couldn't agree with this statement more. There are a very few cases like the National Test Pilot School that make sense, but otherwise unaccredited schools are a horrible choice for the vast majority of people. Yet people get so angry and militant when you say something so completely logical. I guess it just shows we are all very human and it is difficult to remove the emotion from our thinking.

 

I may be wrong but I understood at one time it was illegal to use a non-Oregon approved unaccredited degree for any purpose in Oregon.

How it sounds like it's just illegal to use it in connection with goverment employment.

Did K-W achieve a victory??

 

If so, another question might be...
Did it move from the totally repulsive category to the merely slimy category? Even then, I suppose a victory is a victory.

Jack

 

Up-to-the-minute administrative rules

This is the up-to-the-minute administrative rules that someone, I do not know whom, imposed to ODA.

“Degrees from all of these suppliers are invalid for use in state or licensed employment in Oregon and the use of such degrees can result in criminal prosecution or civil penalties depending on the circumstances of the use."

"In addition, it is illegal to use such degrees or credentials for any purpose unless the user discloses in writing to all persons to whom the degrees is presented that the supplier is unaccredited and unapproved by ODA.”

http://www.osac.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html

 

Re: Up-to-the-minute administrative rules

Hmmm. It sounds like your saying this was the result of the K-W "laying down of arms", otherwise known as settlement. If true, I think K-W out and out lost. Those are perfect descriptions of what an unaccredited degree from a very questionable (read degree mill) school is!

 

I do not know what happens Dave, I love to Know.

I think that someone imposed the new rules to ODA, because they appreciated the past classifications of Diploma Mills, Substandard etc.

However, maybe is an order from the Justice Department; or a court order; or, a Legislative new Law; or an administrative new official policy; or maybe a strategic legal thing.

The only one that can officially state what occur is Dr. Contreras, for the reason that he post in this forum.

 

Absolutely, that's any student's best bet.

It's doubtful that anyone consciously wants to do that. I believe most of the people who enroll in schools that may have a credible course of study but are unaccredited do so because they lack information. Most people simply don't know enough about proper accreditation. A recent CHEA survey found that a vast majority of the general public either gave wrong answers to questions regarding accreditation or simply said they didn't know what agencies accredit colleges or what constitutes a proper accreditor.

Combine the CHEA survey results with the aggresive marketing techniques of the unaccredited schools and there's an answer as to why people enroll. It's quite likely they don't find out about having to justify their alma maters until it's already too late. It's not just individuals who are being fooled either. K-W's site has a state-by-state list of companies that include K-W among schools that are included in employee tuition reimbursement programs. You have to wonder if anyone in those companies knows they are paying for an unaccredited school.

Kit