The University of Advanced Research (again)

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by JMcAulay, Oct 18, 2001.

Loading...
  1. JMcAulay

    JMcAulay New Member

    In March, I posted regarding an email I got from the University of Advanced Research (I goofed in the Subject and called it "...Advanced Studies"). Today I got another one. Hey, am I the only person on their list?

    Anyway, the new email is a far cry from the usual diploma mill correspondence. You know, the ones that read something like: "Send us an extraordinarily large amount of money, and we will send you a beautifully engraved degree of your choice, along with an inpressive transcript."

    This one, you see, offers an entire MBA program for seventy-five bucks. Including shipping charges and all that. Slightly reminiscent of the Herriot-Watt model, this course has nine CD-ROMs and other materials, followed by a single proctored examination.

    I don't want to post the entire letter, as everyone else on the planet may already have one. But if confronted by great demand, I'll post the thing. Some details: the program is said to have tuition paid by "the Delaware NAPL Trust" (what might that be?) and is to be completed at any time between eighteen weeks and four years. Each of the nine CD-ROMs requires 45 hours of study. Oh, yes, the program is said to have an upper limit of 500 participants.

    I looked at their website <http://www.theuniversityofadvancedresearch.org>(which, curiously, is not referenced in the new email), and got a totally blank frame on the MBA page.

    Wonder how their MBA would look, hanging right there next to my Doctor of Sorcery from GDU. It wouldn't cost much more. [​IMG]

    Does anybody have real information about this self-described University?

    Regards,
    John
     
  2. John Bear

    John Bear Senior Member

    While I am reluctant to post really long messages, this one may be worth it. After a friend in Hilo (where I lived nearly two years) went by their "campus" and found it to be in a small building where the other tenants and the landlord both said that "someone briefly goes upstairs once in a while..." I wrote to UAR and asked a few questions about their MBA program, their campus, their faculty, etc. I reproduce, in its entirety, without comment, the first of several comparable letters I received.

    -------------------------
    Date: September 26, 2001

    Attn: John Bear, Ph.D.

    Re: Your recent letter to my office

    Dear John Bear, Ph.D.,

    As a mutual professional courtesy and to save us both the time of ongoing correspondence, I prefer that we immediately move to the end result of your correspondence and my response.

    I received your letter that boast of your relationship with the FBI and about the compilations of known facts that you have published for 26 years.  We will contact the Office of the Director of the FBI tomorrow morning and express, in writing our concern with your threats using the FBI, in an attempt to intimidate or threaten Federal action against this school. We will also send copies of our complaint and your letter to the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney General.

    If you continue to threaten Federal action against us via the FBI, or make or commit or cause to be made any libelous writing or slanderous sayings against the university, I will ensure that your publishers, distributors, wholesalers and retailers are made aware of your illegal activities, to include your other unaccredited school administrators at Heriot-Watt.  They too will receive copies of all literature and/or correspondence between the university, State and Federal agencies.  Your letter is not courteous at all and the university does need you to arbitrate or endorse its offerings.  You illegally threaten Federal action against the University of Advanced Research in a malignant effort  to elevate your position with your followers, sell more copies of your books, create an unfair advantage for your two unaccredited schools, interfere with UAR's economic advantage and restrict its free trade.  The university will not be threatened.

    The university is in a phase of its development wherein battles are expected and lawsuits will arise.  We will neither avoid nor capitulate with aggressors.  Win or lose, the university will stand its ground, defend its rights, its students, its graduates, its reputation, and its methods and continue to operate in the United States, in the State of Hawaii. We will not allow anyone to destroy 10 years of hard work by the school, its students and graduates.  Every resource at our disposal will be used to respond to, initiate and see to completion the legal battles we are certain that we must fight in this endeavor.     

    Your letter is not the typical inquiry.  Your letter is clearly a threat and your attempt to profit at the expense of the University of Advanced Research.  We will not participate in the manner you request.  We will provide to you the same relevant information that we would provide to anyone whom asks.  This is how the university operates and that methodology will not change for anyone, regardless of his or her threats or associations. 

    You are the "expert".  Therefore, any publishing by you that indicates less than an honest academic view of UAR in comparison to the unaccredited schools that you own, associate with and/or operate, will result in all encompassing, all inclusive, non-negotiable action.

    What you wrote is nothing new to us.  Perhaps, to the people that wrote to you, your letter is an impressive display of your vast repertoire of facts.  We teach those same people how to do the same research, compile the data and distribute the information.  

    The University of Advanced Research operates legally and in full compliance with the Hawaiian Revised Statutes for unaccredited degree granting schools. You have asked about our authority to award earned degrees.  Our authority is that same authority that gives Greenwich University (your friends and former partners) its authority to award earned degrees.  Because you have intimate knowledge of and an association with Greenwhich, I believe this response is more than adequate.

    The university is an efficient correspondence school.  The main office exists solely to satisfy state requirements.  Your friends at your unaccredited school should know that.  Thus, I am surprised that you make an issue of their visit to the office when they operate from an old house just minutes away.  The university has made no claim to the contrary.  The main office is where we state its location.  How we choose to administer the school or the locations from which administration is conducted is of no concern.  The office as required by the state exists.  The mission is accomplished flawlessly (we hope) and our students progress.  We do not have a football team or a basketball team or cheerleaders.  We offer low cost and direct correspondence education and all of our disciplines include the learning material, books, disc, etc.

    Use of the word "accreditation" by the agencies you reference is in no way comparable to what American accreditation represents or fails to represent.  As you may know, American accreditation is "For Profit" first, and "For Education" second.  Maybe you should extend your research for your followers.  Explain to those to which you may share this response the following sentence that the United States government provides as one of several reasons for accreditation;

    "To relieve internal and external pressure"

    The term "pressure" referenced  in the sentence above, refers to competition from smaller unaccredited schools and competition from younger more assertive professors educated at unaccredited schools. Your honesty in your explanation to your readers would certainly illuminate the essence of accreditation.  The university partially agrees with accreditation.  However, it certainly disagrees with the restrictions of free trade brought about by the money that accreditation unfairly generates for those with it, in comparison to those schools without that seal of group recognition.  The university does not claim to be accredited nor does it offer some felonious accrediting body that would mislead prospective students.  Any academic researcher should know (and you claim that you are one such person) that the state operated and accredited schools make every attempt to defeat small, innovative institutions.  Their political Alumni pass laws that make it all but impossible to operate a school without constant attacks from the State, competitors whom abuse their authority and positions and from the uninitiated.  They use accreditation as a weapon to defeat the competing, smaller, innovative and unaccredited schools that do not have the same government associations.  Then, they steal our ideas and peddle them as their own for outrageous amounts of money (tuition).  Call the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.  Tell them that you are a low cost, fast growing correspondence school.  Then, ask for the procedure for earning accreditation through the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. Because of your self-taught expertise in the field, I am certain that you will not be at all surprised at their response.

    Explain to your readers whey Regionally Accredited universities may have correspondence courses and offer degrees via correspondence, yet Regionally Accredited correspondence schools are strictly forbidden by the Regional Accrediting agencies.

    Explain to your readers why the Distance Education and Training Council's accreditation does not qualify those who receive its accreditation for government funds.  Moreover, when was the last time that you contacted the  DETC for a price quote?  The process you describe is not free.  The average cost for this "pre-application process" is a minimum $10,000 (ten thousand dollars) for one or two programs... let us not forget that we would have to pay for their lunches and hotel stay.  Additionally, it is against Hawaiian State Law for a school to write that it has applied for accreditation.  If the university undertook those expenses, its degree programs could cost no less than other university's degree programs.  In the United States that is called price fixing and it is illegal. The people, whom complain about our direct approach and methods, are the very people that are unaware of these important issues.  Yet, they are also the very people that need our innovation the most.  But, I am sure that you will counsel them and send them to Heriot-Watt or Greenwhich, your unaccredited schools.

    I hope that you will not withhold those answers in order to save face with the FBI or the publishers of your recent IT compilation or the school administrators from the accredited schools, that granted you interviews for your latest piece of work.

    The school is the University of Advanced Research, Dr. Bear.

    While on the topic of innovation, the university takes education directly to the student via multimedia, questions and answers.  The students themselves are the learners.  The professors on the CD-ROM's are the teachers.  We are the administrators, support, and faculty as needed.  The concept is groundbreaking and we are the best at this method, because we invented the method.  However, because we are unaccredited, we get the insulting letters from people like you.  Responding to you will not accredit us or benefit this school in anyway whatsoever.  This is a courtesy of my time for which you can not repay me.  As stated in our research project offering, we will present the results of our work to Congress, the Justice Department, the Department of Education and anyone else who will listen.  We will reach that goal.  Neither you, nor the government, nor the state, nor an uniformed prospective student will prevent us for reaching that goal.

    Communications between any person and the university is confidential.  Those communications, if any, are not your concern unless either party shares the nature of that communication with you.

    I find your letter disturbing, especially because you are a Ph.D.   Like the people you obviously represent in some kindred way, you failed to inquire about the curriculum.  You proudly state that you earned your Ph.D. in 1966.  Yet, as an academic philosopher and FBI representative you make not comment on our Master's or Doctorate curriculum.  Nevertheless, your degree is accredited so our extensive curriculum and education models do not matter?  Is that what you intend to imply by your failure to comment on the curriculum.  You have not asked a single academic question.

    The staff and faculty with degrees are obviously satisfied with their accomplishments.  Each attended the college(s) of his or her choice.  I will not allow you to smear their names or damage their reputations or cause them or their families harm with chatroom, newsgroup or printed rhetoric.  Their private lives are not open to discussion, debate or scrutiny.  I strictly prohibit any person at this school from wasting student hours or support hours in an unauthorized interview.  That is the staff rule and again, it will not change.  Furthermore, the education is on CD-ROM, in self testing text books or study packets, not in a physical classroom setting.  Therefore, I require that my staff and support team are qualified to perform their task.  For the sake of your inquiry, my education and academic background is fully accredited by more than one Nationally Recognized Accrediting Agency that is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education.  That applies to my key staff and adjunct faculty members as well. For now, that will suffice as you are not capable of providing degree granting authority or accreditation or anything of value to this school, I will leave non-essential disclosures to those that are qualified to accredit or benefit the university, not a competitor. If I have the desire to disclose any further personal information about myself, I will let you know.

    UAR does not have a chatroom.  Support is generalized and not personalized.  Thus, you are attempting to have our school meet your standards of a larger, more expensive school.  We have good standards that cost less and accomplish the mission. In the meantime, we will answer your questions as we would any other prospective student so long as your questions are respectful and academic in nature.  This is the only correspondence that I will have with you on these topics.

    You are biased.  Your own employment and profits from unaccredited schools prejudice your writings.  Why did you start Greenwich University, an unaccredited, degree-granting institution in the State of Hawaii?  Why did you leave your unaccredited degree granting institution?  Did you leave Greenwich as principle so that you could destroy competitors as a FBI informant?  Why do you write so favorably about your prior owned and unaccredited, degree granting institution and so poorly of the other schools that accomplish the same or more?  Does the FBI endorse your compilations at taxpayer expense?  I believe so if they allow you to use the name of the FBI for profit and to threaten criminal sanctions, all of which benefit your two unaccredited schools.

    If the State of Hawaii makes comments about the university that are unbiased and non-defamatory and true, then the university does not have a problem with the State of Hawaii.  However, if your involvement or communications with the State of Hawaii in any way causes the Office of Consumer Protection to unfairly and illegally persecute the University of Advance Research and/or any member associated with it or causes it/them to make or write unfounded statements in an attempt to damage its reputation or interfere with its economic advantage, while simultaneously protecting and providing inequitable treatment to Greenwich University and/or any other school in the State to which you have shown favoritism and/or bias, then both you and the state may be subject to a Federal action against you.  If Greenwich University continues to operate in the State of Hawaii, then so shall the University of Advanced Research.  There can be no distinction.  The state has no statute that allows it to make such a distinction.
    It is impossible for you to be unbiased and perhaps illegal for you to participate in any action that involves an unaccredited degree granting institution.  You are the North American Distributor for Heriot-Watt University, which is NOT ACCREDITED by an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education in the United States, but is a direct competitor for UAR.  Heriot-Watt's "accreditation by virtue of longevity" does not count if UAR's "accreditation by virtue of longevity and service" does not count. You peddle the unaccredited Heriot-Watt via magazines and the Internet openly and unmolested by the FBI.  Then, you mislead prospective students with a long list of schools that have accepted the Heriot-Watt MBA and you further provide misleading excerpts to prospective students that state that Heriot-Watt's acceptance is "as good as accreditation".  The Federal Trade Commission does not make a distinction between "accredited by virtue" and unaccredited.  Who gives you and Heriot-Watt the authority to grant degrees to students in the United States?  Every clandestine attempt you make to participate in or assist in the legal assaults on any school should be, if it is not already, illegal because you claim to be an impartial "expert".  Furthermore, it is impossible for Heriot-Watt and Greenwich to match the speed by which we deploy new curricula because you are a distributor (with no control over the curriculum) and Greenwhich allows the students to "make" a degree program (which is an odd way to teach in any country).  Therefore, it is in your best interest to cause undue stress and aggravation for the University of Advanced Research and to gather blind support for your intentions and to frustrate our attempts to serve students.

    UAR is a correspondence school and, in the United States, so is Heriot-Watt and Greenwhich (your two schools).  Only UAR and Heriot-Watt require proctored examinations.  Only UAR requires notarized evidence, under penalty of perjury, that students have completed the course-work required.  

    This school was founded for the sole purpose of educating others.  Profit was not the primary motivation.  The concept of low cost and good quality education keeps our doors open, not money.  This school loses more money in its endeavor to help adults than it has ever made.  The founders are consistently providing for the school while it provides for others.  We will not be threatened or intimidated by you or anyone else because we are unique and innovative.  On this, you have my word.

    This is an American school.  We will protect and defend our constitutional rights against all enemies, even if the enemy is America itself or some prejudiced faction of profiteers.  I leave it up to you and your followers to determine whether you wish to test our commitment.  A litigious assault on the university will result in equally aggressive counter legal action.  We do our jobs.  We are bold and forward thinking. We are a new way of thinking. What we are not is afraid to fight for that we believe is a worthy goal.

    According to one of my staff, Jeffrey Brunton from the Office of Consumer Protection in Honolulu, Hawaii takes credit for shutting down Monticello University.  You take credit for it in your news group postings.  Do you also work for the Office of Consumer Protection in the State of Hawaii?  Jeffrey Brunton and/or his supervisors will also receive our complaint as you give the appearance that you have a relationship with that agency and that you and that law enforcement agency are threatening improper legal action against the university, in a team effort.  This school does not offer courses in fear. 

    We are well aware that you used the pseudonym of John Beale at [email protected] when you left your voicemail message.  Ironically, we paid $35.00 for your name. I stand by my letter referencing Ms. Bolton's actions.  Her attempt to provide readily available information to other prospective students in a manner that suggested that the university was attempting to deceive the prospective students, was no less an attempt to create hardship for the school than your letter and your actions and your threats.  Her cutting and pasting of nearly two hundred email addresses and then sending her message in batches of 30 or more, to our prospective students was an intentional assault on the university.  I have received dozens of letters from supporters that condemn her actions and praise us for responding and apologizing for our oversight.  I would not at all be surprised if we discovered the Ms. Bolton was in some way associated with you just like Heriot-Watt and Greenwich University.  I find it amazing the she navigated the NCES website so quickly and efficiently, given the ten minute difference between the morning reply letter and her assault on the university and its prospective students.  I also find it odd that she new just the right words to use to start a panic among some of the prospective students that did not understand how accreditation works.  Her name may not be Ms. Bolten.  I hope that this is not the case.

    Dr. John Bear, be advised that neither you nor anyone in association with you is welcomed at this school.  I demand that you and those in association with you cease and desist all communications with this school, to include telephone calls, letters, facsimile transmissions, electronic messages and personal visits of any kind.  I demand that you cease and desist all stalking of employees and harassment that has, could and would damage the contractual relationships between the university, its employees and its landlord.  I further demand that you cease and desist any and all activity that would or could cause harm and/or embarrassment, frustration, aggravation, and/or irritation to any person, employee, student or graduate of this school.  I demand that you cease and desist all activity that would or could interrupt, interfere with or limit the productivity of my staff, any employees, vendors, students and/or graduates of this school. 

    If you desire to share this letter with those people that you represent (according your email message), then you have my permission to do so, as long as you provide the full copy of this letter void of any markings, markouts, strike-throughs or commentary within the body of this letter.

    Nonetheless, this concludes our business.

    For the university:

    Robert Klein, Ph.D.,
    Dean of Schools


    Cc:legal/Provost/Registrar/Admissions/Support Team/ Staff Memo
     
  3. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    I guess Robert has never heard the phrase less is more?
     
  4. RFValve

    RFValve Well-Known Member

    What is worst, they are recruiting instructors that have to pay $1500 to get in, so they make business double way, what a remarkable institution:

    "
    If you choose to continue as a potential IRC, you are invited to fill out an application and authorization for background, credit and employment check. You are required to submit the following:

    A. A completed application
    B. Two years of tax returns (U.S. Citizens only)
    C. Twelve months of bank statements (All Applicants)
    D. Finger Print Card
    E. Social Security Card (U.S.)
    F. Social Insurance Card (Canada)
    G. Government I.D. Number (All Other)
    H. Driver’s License or passport. If you do not have a Driver’s License, you may submit an Official State ID Card
    I. At least five reputable employment and social references.
    J. A 2,500 word description of your chosen country, its demographics, culture and your marketing strategy. *Note: This is extremely important. It is well worth your efforts in the end. The Provost will review your report in finite detail.
    K. $1,500 application fee. Your application fee may be in the form of a credit card, check or money order.
    "
     
  5. John Bear

    John Bear Senior Member

    Thank you, RFValve. The real mystery here, to me, was how UAR hoped to make big bucks with a $75 degree. It seems the answer might well be their hope of selling hundreds or thousands of professorships for $1,500 each.
     
  6. JMcAulay

    JMcAulay New Member

    Let me guess, RFValve: The $1500 Application Fee is non-refundable, right?
     
  7. drwetsch

    drwetsch New Member

    What takes me aback by UAR is the amount of personal information they require from prospective students as well as prospective faculty. Between the two you are disclosing SSN, Driver's License number, income, among others. On the student form you sign that you will not speak badly in any way way of this institution. In return you are being asked to place your trust of very highly personal information in a little unknown unaccredited institution that is at a distance.

    Too many red flags for me -- thank you very much.


    John
     
  8. JMcAulay

    JMcAulay New Member

    I had actually thought I might do this course, figuring that I had spent far more on much less many times in the past. Then I did two things, one of which was prompted by DrWetch's posting: I read very carefully the entire application for admission, finding it to be just 'way too much for me. Such as the agreement that the student will reimburse the institution an amount equal to *one thousand* times the damages in the event of intentional discrepancy on the application form. While I would not *intend* to include any discrepant information, I don't need some witch-hunting zealot claiming that any mistakes were really intentional. Also that proviso that DrWetsch mentioned: you can do *nothing* to interfere with their conduct of the institution once you are registered, including saying anything adverse. Sheesh. This thing reads more like an application for membership in the SchutzStaffel than the student body of a University.

    Then there is the NAPL. Remember, the tuition is said to be underwritten by a grant from the "Delaware NAPL Trust." In the registration info, NAPL is said to be the "National Association of Professionals and Licensees." In a broad web search for this title, only HotBot and Google found it, each in a single location: The UAR application page. Not even AltaVista, which usually finds about 237,689 locations for anything at all, found even a breath of it. As for "Delaware NAPL Trust," no search engine used (Lycos, Yahoo, Google, HotBot, and a few others) matched that title with anything on the www.

    I think I'll just go back to reading Drucker.

    Regards,
    John
     

Share This Page