Reviewing the Review of the Evaluator: Efficacy of Substandard Education Supporters

Discussion in 'Accreditation Discussions (RA, DETC, state approva' started by Bill Huffman, Mar 24, 2005.

Loading...
  1. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I can't post a reply to a similarly titled thread. I am perhaps changing the focus a little so I'll post my reply in a new thread.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to ignore the fact that the higher education system in the USA consists almost exclusively of accredited schools. They might even make up names for people that point out this fact.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to ignore the fact that accreditation is generally how the public (students, employers, etc.) is assured that a school offers a standard education.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to ignore the fact that the vast majority of the unaccredited institutions are not really schools but are just money making scams selling meaningless paper as diplomas.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to ignore the fact that most people will assume that an unaccredited institution is a diploma mill because the vast majority of them are just diploma mills.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to point out that sometimes academic fraud is at least temporarily successful when businesses are tricked into accepting a diploma mill or substandard degree as bona fide. Sometimes these academic frauds may even be in a position of authority this is apparently all pointed out with the silly idea that this somehow justifies substandard education in general.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education sometimes like to point out that a certain diploma mill targets a specific subset of the population with the silly idea that this somehow justifies the academic fraud or substandard education.

    Supporters of academic fraud and substandard education like to point out that sometimes an RA degree may be insufficient to qualify for a job with the silly idea that this somehow justifies academic fraud since an academic fraud wouldn't be qualified either.
     
  2. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Bill, thanks for trying to keep the dialogue going. I too had tried to post and couldn't. I got about 12 from you saying that you had, but only Lerner's was up. Anyway, does it make sense to keep going, if we've lost the thread, so to speak? You raise some good points that need to be seriously considered.

    Of course, I am not suggesting that people engage in academic fraud. Nor am I an advocate of substandard requirements. I do believe in academic rigour and professionalism.

    What I am advocating for, however, is a free and open system which allows alternatives to mainstream accreditation.

    Best,
     
  3. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    HALL OF SHAME

    (In the discussion thread concerning PWU Jake_A stated:

    "Let us now introduce and expose "The Mill Shills / Lying Squad."


    "Mill Shills Hall of Shame:"

    RXI
    (d)r. Latin Juris
    Philip Forte
    Morgan Khanstein

    Who have I missed?"

    Thanks Jake-A. Now, let me illustrate who you did in fact miss:


    Some 40 years ago the president of HARVARD UNIVERSITY resigned his position and took a teaching job at an unaccredited university in the south, serving disenfranchised young African-Americans who were excluded under the regime of segregation. This former president* taught, along with other civil rights activists, out of a basement. Shame on you today who would call that noble entity a diploma mill and its graduates shills!

    Today, the vast majority of Hispanic/Latinos and African-Americans who achieve a bachelor’s degree do not go on to postgraduate studies. Researchers tell us that it is because many of them, burdened by student loans, need to return to work to help support their families. Moreover, they are clearly victims of a system which denies Pell Grants at the graduate level (a proposal which is constantly shot down by lobbyists for the big RA schools). Shame on you today who would cut off affordable higher education alternatives!

    Across America millions upon millions of Americans (e.g. tool and die makers, engineers, business managers, police) have built this country – building parts for NASA, constructing bridges, opening new business ventures – and kept its streets safe. There was a time in the not so distant past when hard work, know-how, and experience was valued, when the backyard inventor was lauded. there was a time when "informal education" had its place. SHAME ON you today who would steal their right to have their contributions to this great nation validated through a diploma, and who would claim that they have engaged in fraud!

    I have a good friend, an ethnologist, who recently went to southern India. He visited an unaccredited college for tribal people, which had been built and was running through a generous grant from the Ford Foundation. You see, in India tribal people, at the bottom of the caste system, are not only excluded from secondary and higher ed, but the there are documented cases of higher castes killing tribal people for something as miniscule as the stealing of a gourd. In Africa there are experimental (“unaccredited”) schools that are attempting to overcome the legacy of the colonial educational structure. In every corner of the world education serves as the propaganda instrument of the regime in power. Yet there are those, seeking freedom and justice, who attempt to open para-schools and systems to reform society. I have met several East Europeans (Romanians and Ukranians) who all held the equivalent of a B.A. in their country who, when they immigrated here, were denied any kind of professional standing and were even told to get their GED before entering college. SHAME ON you today who would only recognize and validate foreign degrees from governmental systems (what a nice rosy picture of the world)!

    SHAME ON all of you who would tame every free spirit and corral every Maverick.


    There is a reason - dear friends - that we need to safeguard a higher education system that allows for alternatives to the mainstream.

    “I have a dream,”

    M.K., Esq.

    *I can’t remember his name. The article appeared several years ago in the Chronicle of Higher Education. (Perhaps Dr. Bear knows and would share?)
     
  4. RobbCD

    RobbCD New Member

    But...

    None of those tasks require an academic degree.

    Contributions or no, a phony degree is fraud. By the way, who's stealing from whom? I worked damn hard for my diploma and those who go out an buy a degree from some unaccredited entity devalue my degree every time they present thier "credential" as legitamate. SHAME ON YOU!
     
  5. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Re: But...

    Now listen up all you newbies. I was a lurker here for years, watching, reading, pondering, and thinking. And then I finally knew that I had to become an active voice, defending the light against the RA Knights and their ploys and tactics.

    Don't be fooled: an unaccredited degree CAN be legitimate, CAN be right, CAN be honest, and CAN be respected.

    The legitimacy of an unaccredited degree depends on your own individual commitment to excellence. By taking the unaccredited route, you will not be a product moving down the conveyer belt of accredited universities. You will not be stamped (and yes – ranked) as being from this or that university. Instead, the respect you have gained throughout your life is now testified to - a sort of notary signifier. Your degree is as good as the dissertation you write – no more no less - and the sum total of your lifelong learning experiences. It is a testimony to what you have accomplished professionally. Now, if you’re 18 -40, or just out of high school please go to an accredited university. However, if you’re over 40, have a stable profession, and your career stands on your accomplishments – not your degree – why not? Couldn’t you use that money for retirement, children’s education, etc.?

    (Here's the problem, I suspect, of some of the RA Zealots (a step above knight) - having spent $300,000.00 on an education, and student loans they'll be paying off till retirement, they now know it was never about the paper - but always about self-cultivation, self-competency and self-development. How sad to learn such a hard lesson late in life. How even sadder to try and get others to share one’s financial ruin. And to think, most libraries are free, and PWU is still under $4K).
     
  6. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Re: HALL OF SHAME

    That appears to be untrue. Here is a list of Harvard presidents. Perhaps it was some other person. Nonetheless, I like your somewhat maudlin argument.
     
  7. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Morgan claims that he's against academic fraud and even substandard education then writes a whole post saying that an unaccredited degree is only as good as the student makes it. Which essentially says, don't put in the work and still get the diploma. That sounds like academic fraud or at least substandard to me.

    Morgan also talks about things happening 40 years ago. TODAY, the higher education system in the USA is essentially all accredited. It was different in the past. In the present, an unaccredited degree almost always equates to substandard.

    Let's discuss the nitty gritty. That way Morgan's statements like him being against academic fraud and substandard education can be exposed as false.

    PWU says that they grant generous "life experience" credit for experienced professionals applying for a Ph.D.. This is bogus and substandard education. I consider people giving or using these kind of degrees to be engaging in academic fraud. Morgan, please respond.

    Thanks,
     
  8. uncle janko

    uncle janko member

    Oh, now we're playing the race card! As a (the only?) triracial poster on this board, and a student at an accredited HBCU, I find that not primarily offensive but just peculiarly stupid.

    However, as a persistent defender of the few responsible and ethical unaccredited schools, I find the insinuation (actually, the lie) that such schools find no defenders here--and that upon the basis of one's paying an amazing amount of money for one's own degree(s)--to be simply silly.
    -------------
    Bill, thank you for a trenchant thread. You started it, so you will have to keep it tidy. And I am sure you will! Your pal, Janko
     
  9. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Bill, thank you for invitation to respond. First, by stating the the degree is only as good as someone makes it I was not arguing for laziness. Instead, I respect excellence, which - in my opinion - can be achieved either traditionally (formal ed) or non-traditionally (informal). By analogy, if you play tennis, and I say that your game is only as good as you make it, does that mean you shouldn't practice? Isn't it possible to set high expectations for oneself outside of the RA institutional process?

    On Life experiences: Would you disallow that any and all RA colleges accept life credit? Many will grant some. ODA will authorize a college that grants less than a certain percentage (was it 20% or 50%?).

    But let me frame your next point as a question:

    Since there are defenders of unaccredited institutions here, when is it ever ethical to use the diploma/degree? When does one knowingly cross the line into fraud, if at all? If you aren't suggesting we outlaw all unaccredited universities, then what limitations should be set on the use of the degrees that they confer, if any? Why?

    Looking forward to your reply.
     
  10. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    If laziness is allowed then substandard degrees are possible. This is the reason that substandard education is substandard. Just because there's an opportunity for someone at a diploma mill to earn a standard education it does NOT mean that the degree is bona fide. An important function of a school is ensuring that people graduating have in fact successfully demonstrated the necessary knowledge for that degree. This is the expensive part of the education process and the reason that diploma mills are so inexpensive because they don't have to ensure that the students have actually grasped the necessary knowledge. Accreditation is what indicates that the school ensures a standard education has in fact been earned without it, the education has the same value as self-study at a library.

    Life experience credit is in general what seems to separate the diploma mills from bona fide standard education. Click on the articles tab at the top of this screen and read the articles on how bona fide academic rigorous credit is bestowed for already acquired knowledge. PWU appears to bestow life experience credit the diploma mill way. This is simply a mechanism to try and convince the scam victim that they have already "earned" a degree or almost so, so just send the diploma mill some money and receive your diploma.

    Life experience credit for a Ph.D. is almost a sure sign of a diploma mill.

    I think that almost all unaccredited Ph.D.'s are bogus because they rarely can satisfy the requirement of making a significant contribution to the academic field of study. The reason is that rarely are unaccredited schools part of the greater academic community. Therefore contributing to the knowledge of this greater community is an impossibility.

    A fair method for use of unaccredited degrees would seem to me to be Oregon's proposed law change, require the holder of the unaccredited degree to get the approval of the ODA (for those in Oregon) or alternatively to specify that the degree is unaccredited and not approved by the ODA.

    How to limit unaccredited institutions to only bona fide institutions is an interesting topic but a very difficult topic. It has more to do with law and the formulation of new law which I consider separate from the current topic.
     
  11. Dave Wagner

    Dave Wagner Active Member

    It might not be a silly idea to point out that schools are not academically fraudulent because they are unaccredited but unaccredited because they may be academically fraudulent... Moreover, unaccredited schools are not substandard because they are unaccredited but they may be unaccredited because they offer substandard education.

    Dave
     
  12. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Maybe. I'm not sure that anyone has disputed it. I certainly haven't.

    The problem is this: If we summarily dismiss quality assurance measures as you seemingly want us to do, then what do we have left to distinguish your legitimate, right and honest non-accredited programs from substandard schools and degree mills?

    The real question here isn't -- CAN any non-accredited school be legitimate? We accept that an undetermined (but clearly small) number of them can. But how are we supposed to know? The real issue is -- ARE particular non-accredited schools legitimate?

    Without accreditation, the burden of proof is on the questioned school, and considerable skepticism is in order. There is NO reason why anyone needs to accept all non-accredited schools uncritically, or why anyone shoud try to smear non-accredited schools together with accredited ones by dismissing accreditation.

    If there's a case to be made for an individual non-accredited school, it has to be made.

    I think that there really are a few good non-accredited schools out there, but absent accreditation, the only people who know that they are good are the people who are already familiar with them. That's why I think that good non-accredited schools are most useful in specialized niche applications.

    That's ridiculous.

    Obviously a person's accomplishments, in education as in everything else, depend in large part on individual effort.

    But that doesn't mean that a degree mill degree suddenly becomes meaningful just because some student who buys one happened to work hard at something.

    What if the very next purchaser didn't do any work at all?

    Buy a meaningless degree? Based only on the purchaser's sense of entitlement?

    If a toy degree is only for vanity and self-esteem, then how is it supposed to work if the purchaser doesn't believe in it? If you are suggesting pre-existing accomplishments are supposed to somehow justify the degree, then why buy a degree at all? Just be proud of the accomplishments.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 25, 2005
  13. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Reviewing the Review of the Evaluator: Efficacy of Substandard Education Supporters

    Thanks, most excellent points.

    Also, my contention is that PWU cannot be accredited because it is substandard. They have a number of practices that are diploma millish. I'm looking forward to Morgan's arguments on the specifics of this issue though.
     
  14. plcscott

    plcscott New Member

    Re: Re: Reviewing the Review of the Evaluator: Efficacy of Substandard Education Supporters

    Right on!
     
  15. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Reviewing the Review of the Evaluator: Efficacy of Substandard Education Supporters

    All great points guys. I'm out on the east coast, so I'm going to have to defer until tomorrow. Let me sleep on it.

    I'll be back. BTW: Now we've got two threads going!

    Best,

    Morgan
     
  16. Jack Tracey

    Jack Tracey New Member

    Re: Re: But...

    First, I'd say that YOU are the newbie (19 posts). Your claim to "lurkerhood" means nothing, anyone could make such a claim. As to your assertion that "an unnaccredited degree CAN be..." please list your top ten unaccredited degrees that CAN be respected. Generalizations mean nothing in this area. Be specific. Which 10 specific unaccredited schools do you believe worthy of general respect?
    Jack
     
  17. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    You have the right idea, Jack.

    Morgan, has already said that PWU is an example of a good unaccredited school. I'm hoping that we can go over some of the details as to why it is substandard and why some here call it a diploma mill (which I do).
     
  18. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Newbies: Beware the LIFE EXPERIENCE ploy

    Listen up Newbies. There are RA Knights amongst us skilled in the art of persuasion. Be not beguiled. I too was almost taken in. They treated me as if I were almost one of their own, all the while setting their trap. What was it, you might ask?

    Newbies, they will tell you that a breach of great distance stands between our unaccredited and their accredited institutions. This then is the RA Knight’s ploy, second only to the oft used “false dilemma.” They will tell you that “life experience credit is in general what seems to separate the diploma mills from bona fide standard education.”

    Yet, their beloved Lord, the ODA, has clearly stated for all to see:

    "Diploma mill" or "degree mill" means an unaccredited school that meets any one of the following conditions.

    (a) Issues degrees without requiring any student academic work.
    (b) Issues degrees based solely on the student's life experience or portfolio without requiring any college-level work submitted to and evaluated by faculty with appropriate academic degrees from standard institutions.
    (c) Issues degrees using more than 50 percent of required credits based on the student's life experience or portfolio.

    Dear Newbies, by their own admission the gap between RA and diploma mill is but 1 percent. (I love the sound of that: one percent). Verily, if only tuition at theirs was but 1 percent higher than ours. Do not be beguiled, dear newbies.

    And what of my own views of life experience? Perhaps surprisingly, I would warn against the use of life credits. But not for the reasons they would whisper to you. Ah, life - full of sorrow and pain. You see newbies, to achieve your sought after degree requires little but patience, time management and perseverance on your part. Answers are clearly in books. Syllabi are handed out. The hard and fast rules of causality govern every action. Stay the course, and but for a few sleep shortened nights, you will reach your ends. Study, it is the perfect square, measurable on all sides. How unfair to compare such a straight and easy path with those who would choose life over study! Life - that fractal of infinite possibilities. I know of none who have accepted her challenges and survived her final call. How impossible to reduce life to a few credits! How unworthy of our calling.

    Listen newbies. I hear the charge of the RA Knights and their howls of their Zealot hounds coming upon us. Run newbies run. Run to the safety of the castle. And which ever path you take, never forget to be all that thou might be.

    Morgan Khanstein, Esq.
     
  19. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Morgan,

    Is that your response!!!!???????!!!!??? You dissappoint me. I thought that perhaps you would be a supporter of academic fraud that was at least interested in some intellectual exchange! You respond with empty nonsense with silly name calling thrown in to boot?

    Did you even read the articles that explain how to turn already obtained knowledge into college credit. Do you not recognize the difference between scam and academic rigor? There was zero conflict between what I said and what Alan Contreras said. I was simply focused on the part of typical diploma mill fraud that has to do with deception. The deception of convincing the victim that a simple resume/application is evidence enough to turn already gained knowledge into college credit.

    Dissappointed,
    Bill
     
  20. Morgan Khanstein

    Morgan Khanstein New Member

    Bill, I’m sorry you're disappointed. My impression was that there was room for “fun” on this discussion group. I guess I had missed the rule that says only defenders of accredited institutions can “dress” up their responses (e.g. “shill,” “troll,” "The Mill Shills / Lying Squad)."

    If you want to view real slanderous name calling please look at Uncle Jenko’s statements on the other “efficacy” thread towards Dr. Latin Juris. It's laced with racism, xenophobia, personal attacks, etc. What I see is that often when a defender of unaccredited IHEs, for whom English is a second language, speaks out the "Truth Squads" pummel him/her, ridiculing their English. (BTW: do RA schools still require mastery of a modern second language, and proficiency in a classical language? If they did, you all would be a bit more tolerant).

    If you're still interested, I am working on a more serious response. I had just thought I’d open this morning with a bit of play.

    BTW: besides the occasional use of playful figurative language (i.e. RA Knights, Zealots, newbies, Zealot hounds - ref those who use slander) I will NEVER resort to the type of literal name calling I have witnessed against my good friend Dr. Latin Juris, who also (ref: the venerable Alan) remains calm in the face of personal attacks.

    But I guess that's why I am Esquire.

    Best,

    M.K.
     

Share This Page