List of Diploma Mills from The Australian

The Australian, Australia's national daily newspaper, has (on Sept. 2) published its own list of what they call diploma mills: nearly 200 of them.
The list is at:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,5017662%255E23004,00.html

Nearly all the usual suspects are on there, and so are
*Kennedy-Western University
*Chadwick University
*Bienville University
*Barrington University
*Columbia Pacific University
*American World University
*Columbus University
*American Coastline University
*Fairfax University
*University of Santa Barbara

They also print a list of schools that they do not call diploma mills, but say their courses are not recognized. This list of 100 or so includes
*Greenwich University
*Pacific Western University
*Lacrosse University

I have a feeling the list will have some tweaking in the weeks to come.

 

O frabjous day, calloo, callay!


Century makes both lists. Twice as good?


There are some that I've never heard of. Buktronix?


There are some outrageous mills in the "non-traditional" list. And Fairfax gets tarred with the mill brush. They'll be getting out the Prozac in Louisiana.

 

Buktronix is a Malaysian 'affiliate' for All Saints American and Saint Regis.
Buktronix Universiti

 

I certainly hope that being on the diploma mill list doesn't help their business any!

 

How to classify a degree/ diploma mill

My research concurs with the limited amount of contributors in the field. Basically, a wide range of evidence must be submitted and analysed before a 'university' (either virtual or physical) can be classified as a 'degree/diploma mill'.

There are two basic models. The Type A, 'Briefcase' Model will sell you a degree of your choice, outright, no questions asked. These vendors will sell you either a replica degree from an established university (deemed 'Novelty' to avoid prosecution), or a degree from a 'university' that is created, via Business Names Legislation (common practice re creation of an offshore entity in jurisdictions such as the BVI, TCI, Seychelles , Dominica etc) based on life experience and/or some token minimal work. These operations are generally classed 'diploma mills'.

The Type B Model is the 'unaccredited university', and this is where it gets real damn hard to determine what is a 'degree mill'. Outside the US, it's pretty cut and dried. Try to be a 'university' in a standard jurisdiction (ie not a Tax Haven) and you will get into real strife. *However*, once we start getting into the areas such as, 'authorised', 'licensed', 'state licensed' in the US etc, then it gets messy.

I need to refer to Levicoff's feelings here, and suggest that I am quite 'provincial' when it comes to classifications. If it's not in the NOOSR publications (which are woefully out of date, but that's for another argument) the alarm bells should ring. However, an informed decision should always prevail.

Worship the fire! Bring on the flames!

Killing Joke

Cheers,

George

 

OBJECTION, your honor!

The Australian is leading the witness to persuade the jury that American College of Metaphysical Theology is a degree mill.

I would like to request a mistrial, based on false information. The Australian states that degree mills offer degrees for $300-$10,000.

Your honor, American College awards the Ph.D. for $199. It could not be a degree mill based on The Australian's criteria.

 

Whoever wrote this should be shot!

Whoever wrote The Australian article deserves to be taken out and shot! The paper deserves to have law suits hurled at it from every quarter, even if some of the institutions they list are actually degree mills. What is the paper's empirical evidence for catogorizing these institutions as 'this, that, or the other'? None! I can see at least 6 institutions I would not gategorise as a degree/diploma mill - I state this from first hand experience! George Brown has posted the most measured response here and others can learn from his approach. Just because an institution awards credit for prior learning and/or life experience does not make it a degree mill! Many British universities do this these days! I know of someone who has been exempted 60% of the course work required for a bachelor's (at a UK university) because of his prior learning. Many UK universities will admit students into the final year of a four years degree programme if they have sufficient prior learning and the diplomas of certain professional bodies.

Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee in the US - and in tother parts of the world! No for one minute do I support degree mills (but as George B points do we really know what we mean by a degree mill?) but you have to be able to distinguish between innovation in education and extortion in education! The notion that if any institution is any good it will mean they will become regionally accredited is nonsense and it is time some people here learned this! The RA system simply seems to serve to make everything and everyone 'bland'. This is true of all major westernised countries where they seek to impose national systems of quality (blandness) control.

I've always been a radical! Well, radical-ish!

'telfax'

 

Here Here or Hearsay?

Here, Here tio the the prevous poster. What basis does the Australian base its classification on. Kennedy, Pacific-Western and Century all make the student perform signifigant course work and thesis development. While to many, they may be precieved as not as highly calibrated as, lets lay a regionally Accredited School. All the aforementioned are legally authorized and liscenced by the state in which they are based to confer degrees, meeting the ststes mandated minimal requirements. if the authors do not like what the the States have described, to meet this criteria, let them petition the States of CA, WY and NM yo change their requirements. Until that time, all these schools are operating legally. To classify the school as a degree mill, without facts to state why is wrong.

Yes, there are true degree mills, who offer dergrees without any cousework. However, in my opinion, while many may not agree, all the above schools require coursework completion consistantly.

Thanks,

RJT

 

Re: Here Here or Hearsay?

RJIT, You would make an excellent degree mill avocate. You should consider changing major.

 

Re: OBJECTION, your honor!

US$199 x 1.85 = A$368

 

Re: Here Here or Hearsay?

This question has been asked before and you've just dodged it before.

Who defines significant? I've seen someone claim that their PhD was earned after significant work. The work they did was to write a 5 or 7 page book report. Your argument that significant work is what is required is fallacious. Instead of significant, it should be a standard amount of work or the expected amount of work, if you prefer. If it is less than the standard or expected amount of work then it is insufficient. The standard is defined by what is normal. For example, the work REQUIRED by Kennedy-Western is far below normal. Within the USA, normal is the standard that is used by the vast majority of colleges in the USA and that is assured by regional accreditation.

 

Agreed

The Australian's classification attempt is quite flawed and I will be bringing this to their attention.

Cheers,

George

 

Spice to the Stew.

Bill:

I understand what you are saying. However, with Kennedy-Western, Bob Jones, CCU, and for all unaccredited schools there is no unversal standard - else, the school would be RA. Hence, the jurisdiction of standard enforcement is left to the State. If a standard is inferior, then the state needs to have it's constituents pressure the state lesgislature for modifications to its minimal standards. P-W, K-W, CCU, CPU, FTU, Century and Barrington, all are meeting the standards of their states, else, the school could not operate. To call these schools a degree mill for complying with the minimal standards set forth by their state of operation, reflects negaitively on the government of the state, and the federal government, which authorizes the state the authority to liscence degree confersing post secondary educational insitutions.

Bill what solution are you proposing, that the government changes it's position to enpower states to authorize private post secondary educational insitutions within their borders? That all states have unversal minimal standards? That no unaccredited schools can exist? That all colleges must be RA/DETC?

Where then is the freedom of school choice left? There must be a reason the Federal Government have confered this ability to states.

In my opinion, schools like Cal Pacific, and the like, add some provokative spice, to an otherwise bland RA stew.

Thanks,

RJT

 

Absolutre clap trap!

Accrediting and other 'quality' agencies (understanably) hide behind nonscence words such as 'standard', 'average' and so on. I wonder how many people here ,who opine on a regular basis, have first hand experience of examining on a very regular basis! I have recently seen a PhD dissertation from Stanford which would never have been 'passed' by me had it crossed my desk! So there we go! You assert that the accrediting agencies ask for specific things to be done and pieces of work to be a certain word length - so what! Well, Einstein's theory of relativity could have been written on a piece of paper the size of a postage stamp! I doubt that would have satisfied the accrediting agencies in the US, UK or anywehere else!

It really is time some of you guys in the US stood back and truly questioned the value, the systems and criteria used by the regional accrediting agencies! It's (getting accreditation), by and large, a question of who is rubbing whose back and $! I am external examiner for a UK university that also awards its degree to a US (fully accredited) institution operating in the UK. A 4.0 GPA is meant to equal a 1st class honours degree! Thus far, other than one exception, all 4.0 have been down-graded, with the full compliance and agreement of the US faculty to a 3rd class or lower second class UK degree! Making a 'generalised' statement, the quality of work produced by students was, in my judgement, somewhere between GCSE and A level standard on the British system and these days that is not saying a great deal in my view!

Lets start making comments based on the evidence rather than personal predilection. Of course, we all come with a bias but there are people here who opine on a regular basis but I question their knwowledge base and their ability to sustain their conservative RA views with empirical evidence.

'telfax'

 

Re: Whoever wrote this should be shot!

Look out! Telfax has gotta gun!!

Which ones?

Can you point me to any schools on the degree-mill list that approximate British university standards?

This newspaper item came out of Australia, not the United States. So, aim it at the Aussies.

Oh, please.

I've posted my opinion on this over and over and over again, so there's no harm in posting it all over again: Accreditation or its equivalent is a quality assurance measure. If a school chooses to avoid it, then the burden of proof is on that school to demonstrate its credibility in some other way.

Obviously that's possible. The CA-approved National Test Pilot's School isn't regionally accredited, but it is known throughout its industry, is one of only five test pilot schools worldwide recognized by the Society of Experimental Test Pilots, and it teaches contract courses for everyone from NASA to the Federal Aviation Administration.

So... which schools on the 'Australian' lists do you think have sufficiently strong academic bonafides to justify them being removed? I'll bet that it will be hard to find *any*. (The former Columbia Pacific might be one.)

What I suggest is to 'Google your school'. If a school offers graduate degrees, particularly doctorates, does it have an academic footprint? Are its faculty and students publishing anything? Are they making presentations at conferences? Are they parts of any larger research collaborations? Are they involved in professional organizations? Are they guest lecturers or fellows at other schools and institutes? Are they winning awards or consulting?

But absent any mitigating evidence, I'd say that active evasion of accreditation is definitely a danger signal that's loud enough to justify inclusion on the 'Australian's' second list.

To say nothing of the dramatically lower utility that a non-accredited degree might have, irrespective of its academic quality. The 'Australian' list was published in Australia. Presumably the bulk of the potential students reading it are foreign (to the US) students who might just automatically assume that any legal American university is fully recognized, and only find out the sad truth after investing a considerable amount of time and money. For that reason publishing a list of DL schools that lack standard forms of recognition is probably a valuable service to Australian education consumers.

I sort of agree with you, and that's one reason why I'm quite fond of the California approved schools: The University of Philosophical Research may be flaky, but it definitely ain't bland. (Its Dean of Programs is Jeffrey Mishlove, the only person ever to earn a Ph.D. in parapsychology from UC Berkeley.) And of course the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality never fails to arouse me. (This one is actually pretty good, academically.)

But accreditation does perform a necessary function, so what would you have us replace it with?

 

Re: Spice to the Stew.

I understand what you are saying. However, with Kennedy-Western, Bob Jones, CCU, and for all unaccredited schools there is no unversal standard - else, the school would be RA. Hence, the jurisdiction of standard enforcement is left to the State. If a standard is inferior, then the state needs to have it's constituents pressure the state lesgislature for modifications to its minimal standards. P-W, K-W, CCU, CPU, FTU, Century and Barrington, all are meeting the standards of their states, else, the school could not operate. To call these schools a degree mill for complying with the minimal standards set forth by their state of operation, reflects negaitively on the government of the state, and the federal government, which authorizes the state the authority to liscence degree confersing post secondary educational insitutions.

Here's some corrections to your statements.
1. Bob Jones follows the standard.
2. True that in general the unaccredited schools don't follow the standard. This means the quality of their education cannot be counted on by potential employers.
3. Your argument that just because a school is operating under a state license, it must be legal is incorrect. There are many schools and businesses that have a license but aren't operating legally.
4. Your argument that just because a degree mill isn't closed down that they must be following minimal standards set forth is incorrect. Frequently there are not laws that enforce the standard or sometimes those laws are not enforced.
5. The schools that you listed I don't call degree mills.

Bill what solution are you proposing, that the government changes it's position to enpower states to authorize private post secondary educational insitutions within their borders? That all states have unversal minimal standards? That no unaccredited schools can exist? That all colleges must be RA/DETC?

Any solution that I propose or we discuss would be largely irrelevant. The fact is that accredited degrees are more useful and accepted than unaccredited degrees.

Where then is the freedom of school choice left? There must be a reason the Federal Government have confered this ability to states.

RJT, you can go to any school that you choose and that you're accepted at? Regarding the federal gov., that statement is false. You've been told many times that it's false. The tenth amendment to the US Constitution says that degree granting authority rests with the states. This is NOT a power conferred by the federal gov..

In my opinion, schools like Cal Pacific, and the like, add some provokative spice, to an otherwise bland RA stew.

There's a huge variety of flavors of school that are RA. One thing you can count on with an RA stew is that it will have more utility than an unaccredited stew. The unaccredited stew might cause acid indigestion or worse.

 

Alka Seltzer ???

What about unaccredited stew and Alka Seltzer?

Plop, Plop, Fizz, Fizz,
Oh what a relief it is!

While it may not be recognized by the DegreeInfo few,
The fact remains that----------------stew is still stew!

 

It is worth noting that the other Chasse school, Summit, also made the list.

 

Re: Re: Spice to the Stew.

Oops sorry, I didn't noticed that you listed Kennedy-Western. I do call that place a degree mill because of their history of bouncing from state to state, because they have an address in a different state from their "administrative office", and because their degrees have required work that is far below the standard defined by the vast majority of colleges in this country. (even though RJT claims it to be significant)

 

Re: Spice to the Stew.

The US is one of the few places where you can have unaccredited but state approved institutions. This is quite confusing for the rest of the world where you only have one kind of universities. The concern of the Australian government is very legitimate since a holder of an unaccredited degree can easily deceive any prospect employer that doesn’t understand the US accreditation system.

Many Australian and Canadian students use the boom and increasing acceptability of DL degrees to get an easy degree at the mentioned universities since the common question in a job interview is “is it approved by the government?” and both kinds of universities would satisfy the human resources officer. Let’s be serious here, if a university doesn’t have to satisfy any standards, they will lower their standards so they can attract students looking just for a paper qualification, most of these places doesn’t satisfy the definition of a university as a place of research and learning.

In Australia and Canada there is an increasing number of professors using such credentials for university teaching and the scary part is that some universities would have to pay for them since “state approved” could satisfy the requirements of some foreign universities for a higher pay.


My understanding is that “state” approved doesn't mean that they have to satisfy requirements as libraries, full time faculty, research facilities, approved plans of study. It only means that the university has some assets and satisfy some minimum business requirements.

I agree with the list, it is not fair for the foreign academic and professional to compete with degree holders of “degree” mills that deceive the general public with this non-sense of “state approved” but unaccredited university.