Columbia Pacific reports they are now accredited by Malawi

The recognition of MIGS seems pretty cut-and-dried to me. All universities of any size have individual departments and colleges. MIGS is no different. Some departments/colleges within the State university systems in the USA have accreditation (professional) for the individual department/college in addition to the overall university accreditation. MIGS is a department/college so to speak within CEU. Few posters on this NG question departmetns within any other university the way MIGS is attacked.

The way some of the members of this NG post and the frequency with which [you] all post make me wonder if any of you'll have lives.

MIGS may have been poorly marketed but that is all MIGS is guilty of as discussed in this NG.

Any legitimate university written about in the manner of Dr. Steve Levicoff has the right to sue this so called expert. If Dr. Levicoff not been an "expert" in distance education no suit could/would have been brought.

CEU is no different than The University of South Africa in accreditation (GAAP) principles.

My five cents.

Wes

 

Originally posted by Rich Douglas:
I could be wrong. You never know.

To your credit, no one will ever be able to accuse you of dishonesty, Rich, that's for sure.

 

How to win friends and influence people:

Originally posted by DWCox:
The way some of the members of this NG post and the frequency with which [you] all post make me wonder if any of you'll have lives.

 

Originally posted by DWCox:
Any legitimate university written about in the manner of Dr. Steve Levicoff has the right to sue this so called expert. If Dr. Levicoff not been an "expert" in distance education no suit could/would have been brought.

You sound like an expert on this issue, DWCox. So that means it's a good idea for Steve to sue you, right? Should we all sue you for the comment about how we'll have no lives because of our postings here?

 

Guess what Piper, few in this NG are here to make friends, myself included!

I just call it like I see it, but somewhat less threatening than Dr. Steve. I just can't sort out why this NG will not accept CEU other than the fact that most do not like Sheila. There is however a well established institution behind MIGS. Like it or not.

 

You sound like an expert on this issue, DWCox. So that means it's a good idea for Steve to sue you, right? Should we all sue you for the comment about how we'll have no lives because of our postings here?[/B][/QUOTE]


I have never obtained any of my multiple RA degrees via the distance model nor have I authored any reference books on the topic nor have I testified on the subject. I am an expert in the a professional field and do testify frequently but this does not qualify me as an expert in distance learning.

By the way I'm not new to any of these NG's.

 

A Response to Bill Dayson (fully quoted below):
Bill, your points are well taken and certainly relevant. And your stance as a skeptic will also inform your opinions. Below is the URL for the Indian accreditation announcement. I'm sure that you don't mind doing research in association with your propensity for speculation: http://www.cpuniv.edu/AlNws98.htm.
I certainly don't see anything indicating "an alternative to recognized institutional accreditation". There is no such alternative (in my opinion). But I don't particularly agree with Crews' assertion that the Indian accreditation is a significant achievement, (although it may be an achievement in the sense that they got something in writing, which was later backed out of when the new tribe leader was elected).

Your concern regarding the Malawi acceditation is poignant, I believe. Perhaps you would care to deliver your questions to Dr. Les Carr, the man himself. Les email is:
[email protected]

I have written Les the following in regards to my questions on foreign accreditation and equivalency:
Blockquote of yesterday's email to Dr. Les Carr:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Les,
As you know, there is quite an industry at work that evaluates foreign
degrees and rates them as equivalent (or non-equivalent) to USA accredited
degrees.

Given that at this point in time CPU has no mission in Malawi, and that
degrees, presumably, would be granted from Montana (until a mission is
established) what do you suppose would be the equivalency of the newer CPU
degree?

Would the degree be granted from Malawi, or Malawi-Montana, or Montana? I'm
just looking at the possibilities in terms of circumventing the standard
procedures that evaluators face. Evaluators describe themselves as
evaluating degrees from out of the country, not degrees from in the country
but accredited by a foreign power. This is a new one and may need some
thought. As you know it will apply to any and all graduates that reside in
USA. What are your thoughts, as paradoxical as this "new beginning" seems?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
End of Blockquote re: Kavanagh Email to Les Carr

Regards,
Earon

Bill, your points are well taken and certainly relevant. And your stance as a skeptic will also inform your opinions. Below is the URL for the Indian accreditation announcement. I'm sure that you don't mind doing research in association with your propensity for speculation: http://www.cpuniv.edu/AlNws98.htm. I certainly don't see anything indicating "an alternative to recognized institutional accreditation". There is no such alternative (in my opinion).

Your concern regarding the Malawi acceditation is poignant, I believe. Perhaps you would care to deliver your questions to Dr. Les Carr, the man himself. Les email is:
[email protected]

Regards, as always, dedicated to facts
Earon

 

Originally posted by DWCox:
Guess what Piper, few in this NG are here to make friends, myself included!

I just call it like I see it, but somewhat less threatening than Dr. Steve.

You write that most of us here have no lives and then you say you're "less threatening"? Yeah, you're a real sweetheart, DWCox.

I just can't sort out why this NG will not accept CEU other than the fact that most do not like Sheila. There is however a well established institution behind MIGS.

Sheila has little or nothing to do with CEU. The problem with the MIGS-CEU relationship, as I see it, is that CEU is basically a vocational school, sort of a Mexican ICS, and now they want to award "accredited" doctoral degrees in the United States. Sheila, who apparently owns MIGS a.k.a. DEGREE.COM and a pre-written term paper service, is a separate problem for the MIGS reputation. Enrique, who isn't quite sure how a calendar works, is a separate problem for MIGS. The fact that MIGS is not operating legally in the United States is a separate problem for MIGS.

Like it or not.

 

I'd suggest that most of the regular posters occupying this space see their activities here as a passionate avocation. Some even may be embarking on a vocation (I'm thinking of Tom Head particularly). John Bear writes on distance ed for a living, Steve Levicoff published some books some time ago, but seems to be very passionate at the moment from the perspective of an avocation. Steve is currently grooving the highways and biways of America from behind the wheel of a big rig (I assume it's a big rig).

Most regulars here have been researching various institutions for some time, and could be considered, on that basis, as experts of some form. Some have published - some have not. Most engaged in such research seem to be focused on consumer protection. I'm more interested in philosophical issues on adult learning based on narrative knowledge, changing regulations, and the construction of institutional and graduate identity - public perception, etc. I'm also interested in researching those who have such passion about distance ed and non-traditional, namely the folks here.

I'm not exactly sure of the importance of the opinions here. For example, it will be interesting to see the result of Steve's contact with Mercer University staff. I think this group can influence prospective consumers but I'm not sure to what degree it can influence institutions as of yet. But it can certainly engage in activism and make a big fuss (for some that could be part of the fun, although I'm uncertain as to the ethics surrounding prying into the lives of individuals; nor am I convinvced that blatant abuse in such practices would not result, in some cases, in serious, even violent, reprisals). That could eventually account for something ... or not.

I also think that topics surrounding distance and nontraditional adult education are a big part of the regulars' life here. It is a passion for most of us, and we all come to this passion from a variety of experiences. Most people know of my own experiences with Columbia Pacific University. Others are passionate that regionally accredited institutions with nontraditonal programs are getting burned by the reputations of unaccredited schools and blatant mills (see Stewart and Spille, 1988 -Diploma Mills: Degrees of Fraud). All in all this is a place of sneeringly healthy and sometimes questionable skepticism and I've grown over the past five years to respect most of the participants.
Earon

 

Earon rather angrily tells me to read a
1998 CPU newsletter whose link he
posted. It contains the words:

First, we have become the first
nonresident graduate university
chartered and accredited by Native
American higher education authorities. 
In May 1998, CPU was incorporated and
granted a charter including
accreditation as a private postsecondary degree-granting institution by the
Fallon Shoshone-Paiute Governing
Council.  In conjunction with this, we
are delighted to be extending our
programs to include a College of Native
American Studies and Sacred Traditions.
[/QUOTE]

It certainly sounds as if they are
claiming institutional accreditation
from the tribe. They claim to be
accredited as a "private post-secondary
degree granting institution". Then they
say that they are putting in a new
Native American Studies program, but it
isn't suggested that the tribal
accreditation only extends to that
degree program. This seems to be a lot
more than the American Psychological
Association accrediting a clinical psych program.

And as I recall, this newsletter page
was not the only mention of this
Shoshone-Paiute 'accreditation' on the
CPU website at the time. Unfortunately I did not record copies of the site as it
was then, and it has subsequently been
changed.

Now Dr. Carr informs Dr. Bear:

Columbia Pacific University has just
received legitimate foreign
accreditation... If you wish I will send you a copy of the official letter of
accreditation-from the democratic
Republic of Malawi. There is a definite
reason for CPU seeking accreditation from a stable democratic country in Africa...

There no suggestion that this accreditation is only for a particular program in African Studies. The implication is once again that it is institutional accreditation.

So I think that I was probably being too kind in my last post. I don't see any evidence that this is a case of specific program accreditation being confused for general institutional accreditation. The intention definitely seems to be to suggest institutional accreditation.

 

Hi Bill,
Thanks again for sharing your opinion, looking over the material in the link, and placing it here.

However, I still stand behind my original contention, which is:

. . . your points are well taken and certainly relevant. And your stance as a skeptic will also inform your opinions...
I certainly don't see anything indicating "an alternative to recognized institutional accreditation" (Bill's words). There is no such alternative (in my opinion). But I don't particularly agree with Dr. Richard Crews' assertion that the Indian accreditation is a significant achievement, (although it may be an achievement in the sense that they got something in writing, which was later backed out of when the new tribe leader was elected).

As for what was on the website in 1998, there was no other reference, based on my memory, to the Indian accreditation on the CPU website. Having said that, there may have been such a reference in the section of the website on accreditation/approval (which was removed in 1999). This would have been where the statement would have been placed. However, there was a reference to CPU having an intention to pursue accreditation with WASC. This, I found to be, in effect, misleading. The statement was taken down in 1999.
Earon

It certainly sounds as if they are
claiming institutional accreditation
from the tribe. They claim to be
accredited as a "private post-secondary
degree granting institution". Then they
say that they are putting in a new
Native American Studies program, but it
isn't suggested that the tribal
accreditation only extends to that
degree program. This seems to be a lot
more than the American Psychological
Association accrediting a clinical psych program.

And as I recall, this newsletter page
was not the only mention of this
Shoshone-Paiute 'accreditation' on the
CPU website at the time. Unfortunately I did not record copies of the site as it
was then, and it has subsequently been
changed.

Now Dr. Carr informs Dr. Bear:

Columbia Pacific University has just
received legitimate foreign
accreditation... If you wish I will send you a copy of the official letter of
accreditation-from the democratic
Republic of Malawi. There is a definite
reason for CPU seeking accreditation from a stable democratic country in Africa...

There no suggestion that this accreditation is only for a particular program in African Studies. The implication is once again that it is institutional accreditation.

So I think that I was probably being too kind in my last post. I don't see any evidence that this is a case of specific program accreditation being confused for general institutional accreditation. The intention definitely seems to be to suggest institutional accreditation.

[/QUOTE]

 

DWCox, I'm very pleased that you're leading such a full and enriching life. I'm also pleased that you've seen fit to tear yourself away from it to let me know that you wonder about the lack of my life as well as others. How much of your life did you sacrifice for the post?

Only my 2 cents, I guess I still owe you 3.

 

The fact of the matter is that MIGS is not really a department or college of CEU, it's a seperate entity that claims standing in (depending on who you believe) Texas, Florida, and Nevada, places where CEU has no standing whatsoever. That's a lot different than colleges that make up a university.

If MIGS is actually an integral part of CEU, then why do they have seperate Presidents, Boards of Trustees, etc.?

And to ask some tired questions again (not that I expect any answers, I know better by now), what process did MIGS go through to secure their "accredited" status through CEU? When did the site visit occur, and did it occur in Florida, Texas, or Nevada? Who conducted the site visit? For that matter, where the hell is the MIGS main office?

Bruce

 

Dear Reader:

let me congratulate John and others for exposing those "kinky heads" with fake diplomas - I am referring to the GMA report.

Would you consider Colimbia Pacific University a DIPLOMA MILL?

Also, I would suggest that a documentary be done on schools such as WALDEN and SARSOTA which institutions were publicly referred to (including documentation) as DIPLOMA MILLS before they gained regional accreditation.

There is a lesson Here!!

Also, do you have any information on Ross University in the Caribbean. My wife is interested in applying to study Medicine. In fact here Gynecologist in Oregon is a gradaute of Ross in Dominica. What do you think?
Ron

 

I know I must sound pretty thickheaded, as I've posed these questions/points in other posts, but I've never really been able to satisfy myself that I understand what happened to Columbia Pacific.

Free-floating points . . .

In the 1980s, wasn't Richard Crews included in Calif. legislative committees that were examining the approval structure for non-traditional and DL schools? It seems like he was taken seriously as the president of a DL institution who was trying to refute the notion that DL = mill and who favored rooting out the "true" mills.

Fast-forward 10 years, and now he and the school are seen as going off the charts.

Others have posted that this was in part the result of a school being dominated by one person who led it astray, yet others say that Les Carr has been largely the driving force, not Crews.

In looking over the literature that CPU produced over the years, it appears that -- at least on paper (which I know can mean many thing!) -- the school became more orthodox in terms of curriculum structure and graduation requirements. And yet, the demise of the school sends out a message that pedagogical anarchy was prevailing. I'm wondering if the qualitative standards for student dissertations and theses stayed the same over the shift from the "salad days" to the school's end in California.

 

Yes, but the lesson is to learn one's history and properly apply it. The Walden and Sarasota vs. CPU comparison does not hold up. All three were established in the 1970s. Also, all three enjoyed some academic acceptance in their pre-accredited days. But Walden and Sarasota went on to accreditation. CPU went to AFRICA! Also, CPU never had residency requirements, nor much structure in their curricula. They awarded degrees in just about any area--and language--desired by the student. Walden and Sarasota stuck to a few areas (psychology, business, and education) they knew well.

No, a more apt comparison would be CPU and Clayton University. And that's sad.

Rich Douglas