Hallmarks of non-U.S. degree legitimacy

Defining in statute what a legitimate university is sounds extremely difficult, if not impossible, assuming that we don't want to reject any legitimate universities in the process. Even if we could come up with one today, a creative con-man would likely figure out a way to meet the letter of the law (or appear to) for his degree mill. I would suggest trying to leave it up to a government office that could more easily react to new diploma mill set ups, ala Oregon's ODA.

 

Unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. Even when you leave it to an office like Oregon's ODA, said office must still have statutory guidelines that will withstand constitutional scrutiny. Vagueness and ambiguity and/or just leaving it people in such offices to decide what's best is exactly what courts have said we cannot do. Sooner or later it must all be codified. It isn't a question of "if" but, rather, "when" and, more importantly, "how." There's no escaping it. It must be done -- even if it's done, in the case of foreign degrees, by the state simply saying in its statute something along the lines of that no foreign degree is acceptable until and unless it is assessed by AACRAO or an assessor that is a member of NACES or laguage similar to that.

All states are now contemplating some kind of legislation to bring an end to diploma mills and/or the use of credentials therefrom. The only legislative tool available is regulation. Regulatory language, by definition, involves the prohibition of behavior or speech that may be constitutionally protected. The courts have held over and over again that constitutionally-protected behavior or speech my be regulated, but only when certain things are true, among them that precisely what the citizen may or may not do in order to operate within the law is painfully clear and spelled-out nearly to the point of absurdity.

Like it or not, defining a foreign degree that will be acceptable to the state; or that can be made acceptable via a simple, inexpensive and easily-available-to-all process (such as, for example, assessment by AACRAO or a NACES member agency), is something that will definitely have to be struggled with by someone, somewhere along the line. I'm simply trying to make a record of the opinions of this learned group so that said opinions may become part of the marketplace of ideas regarding this issue when the time comes; as well as so that I may be guided by them (to the degree that I should permit myself to be) in the event that I become part of the process of writing the regulatory language... which might just happen, based on who has contacted me and what they've asked me to consider doing (but which I may not end-up doing... just depends).

I understand your point, Bill. And make no mistake about it, it's a good one. Were that it were as simple as just letting good folks like Alan Contreras do their jobs as we already know they know how to do -- and do well, I might add. But no regulatory language that I'm aware of which operates that way has ever stood up to a constitutional challenge. Don't get me wrong, there's all kinds of vague and ambiguous regulatory language like that in effect all over the country. But it stands today only because no one has had the time, energy, inclination or money to take the language to task on constitutional grouds.

So, the other excellent points in this thread (including yours, by the way) notwithstanding, my original qustion, stated now another way, stands:

If we are forced to commit to paper some kind of definition of a foreign degree which any state should accept on its face, how would we do so?

If the differences from country to country are so vast that we would end-up having to list the countries whose degrees we will accept, and those whose degree we will not (a ridiculous notion, but presented here just so I can ask the larger overall question), then what procedure for assessing foreign degrees (and determining if they are on-par with the U.S. degrees that the state accepts) can we define in regulatory language?

Or is there yet another approach?

C'mon people... I've read the other posts throughout this forum. There are some very sophisticated thinkers around here who have espoused some very interesting and sometimes even amazing ideas. We can do this... I'm confident of it.

 

Where's the Nader sticker?
Now, back to topic...

 

I agree.

It's going to be difficult to get unanimity on what "legitimate" means. I think that most people agree in general, but there are going to be disputes about where the cut-off line should be drawn.

A more serious problem is the lack of information available on many questioned schools. This problem becomes acute for foreign universities operating from unfamiliar and often doubtful jurisdictions. So even if we think that we know just what a legitimate university is, how can we really be sure that University of East Obscuristan belongs in that class?

Asking the foreign government isn't always reliable, as we discovered with SRU. Demanding that the government have elaborate accreditation standards isn't reliable if the standards are never enforced or if they are subverted with a bribe. Consulting reference books or credential evaluators just hands the problem off to somebody else.

I like my Google test. Just look and see if the academic and professional communities already recognize a questioned school. I mean, what are the chances that a legitimate university exists out there, but you are the very first person in the world to notice it? Right.

But that isn't the kind of precise and simple algorithm that Des Elms wants us to give him. I doubt whether such a litmus test even exists.

Degreeinfo had a front-row seat to precisely that. John Bear popularized the idea of "GAAP" in his books, and the mill operators immediately set to work trying to beat it. MIGS and SRU are examples of the results. If by some miracle Des Elms imposed his own vision on the United States, the mills would be trying to subvert it the next day.

I'm not sure that I favor a legislative "solution" at all.

A problem is that laws automatically become entitlements. A mill operator could say "Look, my school meets the conditions set out in the law! My school is entitled to recognition in your state!

But employers, clients and colleagues, left to their own devices, are free to exercise their own independent judgement and to use their own common sense. They can look for information wherever they can find it and react if something doesn't smell right.

What people need is some guidance in making those judgements. But absent some form of reliable international quality assurance mechanism, which is going to be a long time coming, I don't know quite what it could be. Even the experts are sometimes at a loss to figure it out.

 

Nader outpolled the Libertarians in '96 and '00. Wonder if the Libs will outpoll him this time?

This is an interesting topic. Accreditation will be discussed and debated till the end of the ages, I'm afraid.

 

Degrees for experience

I have heard many people on the board saying that ANY degree that is awarded based on experience would be illegitimate. So how would legislation handle countries that endorse this practice? Would we simply disqualify any university in France because France passed the VAE law???

 

Re: Degrees for experience

Legitimate institutions award credit based on experience. If the credits add up to a degree then the degree is based on experience. I know of no country where it is done differently. If you know of a country that endorses degrees for experience then please name it. Also, I never heard of the VAE law. Can you please explain?

Thanks,
Bill

 

The entire question of legitimacy has already been solved. The United Nations Assembly decided, by mutual agreement, that any degree accredited by any UN member nation would be accepted in any other nation, i.e. a degree from Spain would be accepted in Belgium . . . Then along came SRU ...

 

Re: Re: Degrees for experience

 

If this is true then this discussion is moot... Even for institutions like SRU...

 

Re: Re: Degrees for experience

VAE Law is French - this law allows for the awarding of a degree in totality, not just a few credits.

"la validation des acquis par l'expérience (VAE)" use Google to find and translate, or read below in French.

http://www.sorbonedu.com/2002-VAE.pdf

 

I wrote: Consulting reference books or credential evaluators just hands the problem off to somebody else.

But if our task is to identify a clear set of criteria that will allow us to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate schools outside the US, handing the problem to "experts" probably isn't a satisfactory answer.

If our fundamental problem is a lack of information about foreign mystery schools, handing the problem to people whose processes aren't transparent only adds another level of mystification to the existing murk. We are even further from clarification.

 

Re: Degrees for experience

I don't believe that anyone on this board has ever said that.

If Degreeinfo has a fault, it might be that it places too much emphasis on prior-learning-assessment and "testing out", at the expense of the many course-based DL programs that aren't discussed here.

Prior-learning-assessment isn't a new thing here in the United States. Virtually all universities allow credit by challenge exams and have done so for many years. We even have schools like Thomas Edison State College and Charter Oak that specialize in PLA.

The essential question is whether the assessment processes are credible and sound.

I see little relevance in France's belatedly approving the same kind of thing. The main interest is the way that some degree-mills have tried to argue that this new French policy somehow justifies their own "life experience" degrees.

 

I guess I must agree with this supposition to certain extent. Admittedly, third world countries cannot have facilities such as NASA, to name just one. This, of course, entails extensive scientific research and funding to sustain its set objectives and strategic mission. But one must also realize that new discoveries, inventions, and that sort of things, once established are recorded, published, and circulated (through journals, books, and etc.) for all to read and learn. In other words, the third-world countries might not need geniuses to research on certain areas of knowledge, as they don’t have facilities like NASA (just an example here). However, the fact that “bodies of knowledge” can be circulated and therefore learned, chances are, third world countries may also be able to acquire that knowledge, and perhaps, innovate based on that knowledge. So, I may add an exception to the generalization that degree holders from third world countries have inferior knowledge than those in the US. Degree wise, and with the assumption that knowledge is transferable, I suppose it’s not quite fair to conclude that an average degree holder from a given third world country couldn’t catch up with an average degree holder in the US.

I couldn’t think of a significant difference (theory and practice) in constructing a building (just an example again) designed by a civil engineer/architect from third world country, and a building designed by a civil engineer/architect from the US. They both, I think, would apply exactly the same engineering principles to ensure the building can withstand the forces of nature.

Granting that knowledge is transferable, I couldn’t imagine a university in a third world country teaching students to cut objects using stone (stone age technique) while a knife (bronze age technique) has already been widely introduced as an effective tool. Although one might argue that third world countries may have acquired the theory but don’t have the “knife” to practically cut objects efficiently (therefore no actual experience). However, others can also defend the fact that someone will have the ability to perform certain things out of the knowledge previously acquired (when chances come their way). After all, anything one does comes, always, from the brain. So, for purposes of academic advancement (or for admission to institutions), I also find it unfair to turn down a prospective student on the sole basis of degree-origin.

My BS degree in engineering (from a third world country) involved a five-year fulltime learning of the humanities/social sciences, computer sciences, basic and advanced engineering sciences, management sciences, business concepts (including marketing, accounting, finance, economics, etc.), physical, behavioral, mathematical, statistical, organizational, ethical, and legal concepts (business law, labor laws, etc.) so that graduates would be able to plan, design, implement, and manage integrated production and service delivery systems that assure performance, reliability, maintainability, schedule adherence and cost control.

Never, in my whole five years studies, have we used an engineering or mathematics text/reference book written in the local language or authored by local author (if not American author British author, although printed locally). What makes the difference on its delivery, perhaps, is the “accent” of the instructor. And I don’t think accent would have anything to do with the computation of how much materials would be needed for strong and reliable foundation of the building to be erected (an example) that it may able to withstand the forces of nature.

Assuming that all are legitimate, there is one thing that tinkers behind my subconscious as to whether or not degrees from third world countries should be acceptable in the US or anywhere (for whatever purpose), the centuries old tradition of “mine is better than yours”.

cheers