Union Degree Titles-From OBR

I don't know of any legitimately accredited school that doesn't list a major on the transcript.

My transcripts specify everything.....major, courses, degree awarded, etc.

This is a prime opportunity to ask....do you hold a Ph.D. from Penn State?

I'll trot out one of my most useful lines......

Unless you answer my question in regards to your alleged Ph.D. from Penn State, I will monitor every thread that you post to, and I'll ask the same question endlessly until you answer me.

Oh, I will need some verifiable information, also.

 

LOL

Bruce you guys here are so degree oriented!

I am not. You know it is funny at Holy Names College (where I earned my undergraduate degrees- Doble major Summa Cum Laude since you care so much) The Sisters ALWAYS went by SISTER not DOCTOR .

We all knew they had doctorates but it was not what was important to us.

There where some sisters who carried the title in such a way as to say "Hi I am a Sister give me your seat on the bus"

Just as some carried the PHD such a way as to say " Because I have this degree you are wrong and I am right and I am sooo much smarter"

But the answer to your question is not quite yet. I successfully defended the dissertation and have filed to graduate this term so by the time most read this thread the answer will be yes

I don't get your militant desire for proof. I can show you the bottom part of my transcript that lists the "hoops" since I was just looking at at for this thread and includes the succesful doctoral defense

I do not get why you care frankly.
Heh I have a great GPA and such and highest honors in both BA and MA level but this is very tangential to this discussion

I care how you act here. I do not approach people and say give me proof of your degree. I engage in conversation The quality of their conversation usually proves the quality of their degree or their thought if they do not have a degree.

Since you are being militant about the degrees I will be militant on one of my issues. The moderator who banned me as rlevant owes a BIG apology. And your attitute that allows personal attacks and harassment is not something that reflects what _I_ value in education. Well educated folk should not tolerate the sort of nonsense I have seen here.

And I don't give a hoot where YOUR degrees come from. I do care HOW you engage in conversation and treat other people



And I won't continue this further as it is not relevant and I would hope if anyone attempts to attack you would act like an educated person and ..well..shut them up ;-) This is an interesting thread and its a shame you feel the need to divert it. PM me if you want a copy of the "unofficial " transcript

I hate degree conscious attitudes. I am an educator and a Priest ad those are the things I care about. Credentials matter only to the extent they reflect an educated person and approach to life.

Best

Best
Rev Renee (who WILL NOT be changing to Dr Renee at ANY POINT -- Doctor is just a degree. I am more concerned with who I am as a person and how I live and to Whom I am accountable first...and that is not to the accrediting agencies

 

So here is what Union does

The PhD in Interdisciplinary Studies in Arts and Sciences with a concentration in English literature

would be listed on the diploma (see policy below) as

Degree: PhD
Concentration: English Literature

I think I see the OBR's concern on this one.






Doctoral Degree Titles
(May 2003)

To clarify some concerns regarding degree titles, the following Frequently Asked Questions and Answers are provided:

1. What is the degree title that should appear on my Program Summary, PDE, and other Committee documents?
Answer: The degree title for these documents should be: Doctor of Philosophy in Interdisciplinary Studies with a Concentration in (….)

2. What wording appears on my transcript at graduation?
Answer: Two lines related to your degree appear on the transcript, as follows: Degree Program: Doctor of Philosophy Area of Concentration: (.…)

3. What wording related to the degree title appears on my diploma?
Answer: The degree of Doctor of Philosophy. (There are no concentrations stated on the diploma).

4. Why are there differences among the documents?
Answer: Documents submitted by the Learner and Committee reflect the true interdisciplinary nature of the Union Institute & University and represent external credentialing bodies’ understanding of the doctoral program. The transcript reflects the abbreviated statement of the degree and concentration. The Diploma represents the single degree title.

 

[/B][/QUOTE]

Congratulations!

It's all about credibility. If someone will lie about something so easily verifiable as a college degree, they most likely will lie about a lot of other things.

[/B][/QUOTE]Since you are being militant about the degrees I will be militant on one of my issues. The moderator who banned me as rlevant owes a BIG apology. And your attitute that allows personal attacks and harassment is not something that reflects what _I_ value in education. Well educated folk should not tolerate the sort of nonsense I have seen here. [/B][/QUOTE]

To be perfectly blunt, Renee, what you want doesn't matter a whit here. You registered a few days ago, and now you're making demands?

I'll also mention one other thing.....I'm far from a grammar Nazi, but yours is exceedingly poor, especially for a Ph.D. candidate.

 

To be blunt back
I don't care about your opinion on this


Your behavoir is very bad. Your accusations about the Union Issue turned out completely false and your attitude doesn't belong anywhere in higher education or where intelligent conversation is expected
Apparently it is optional here on these boards.

Your choice Officer

And as a cop LOL

Well I usually see this this sort of attitude and approach to the public from those who end up at the other end of review boards. Have a great day Officer Bruce

 

Hmmm...

Seems to me Bruce's request was more than reasonable. Credibility is a vital issue in any discussion. Like Bruce I am puzzled by the lack of grammar in any Ph.D. candidate's posts. I think Renee has brought up some great points and added to the discussion.

 

My dear Wehemu Renee:

Why does anybody on this board care about the legitimacy of degree claims or other academic claims? If you would back up from your own ego-contemplation (and attacking Bruce) just a wee bit, you might notice that many of us have devoted a lot of effort to defending the integrity of distance education against the false claims made by fraudulent individuals and so-called schools.
Then again, you might not.

Janko

 

I believe Renee is seeking conversation on the topics raised and is rightfully indignant at being attacked as a whack job or someone with a lack of credibility. This is a discussion forum that should be open to those who do not violate the TOS, not a court of law or a traffic stop.

 

Congratulations, Renee, you've managed to use up your one freebie from me in near-record time.

Personal attacks are a violation of the TOS, even attacks on a moderator.

 

Show me where I attacked anyone or called them a "whack job". The thing is, Rod, that it gets pretty tiresome dealing with mill shills here, so I find it better to cut through the bull**** and ask direct questions. When those direct questions are ignored, a huge red flag goes up.

I'll never understand why some people are obsessed with my being a police officer. In any event, I have many more restrictions in a court of law than I do here, so I'm not sure what the connection is supposed to be.

 

Hi Kirkland: I never called the wehemu a whack job or anything like that. However, she does run a siminerry and won't substantiate quotes, which calls into question what she's up to. Her belligerence is commonly found among mill shills. That doesn't prove she is one, but her "school" raises serious questions and her haughtiness is unbecoming--but then I've never cared for the airs of the higher ranks of the clergy. Have a nize day. Janko

 

Bruce, Janko,

Actually it was Steve Levicoff who felt the need to express himself in a related thread.. "...But what makes me more curious is the wording in the senior whack job's (Renee's) bio:..." I think in a previous sentence he also said "IMO she's a whack job". These insults slid by without mention or warning. Is this acceptable behavior, even if one precedes the insult with "IMO"? I'm not picking on Steve, but I was asked to provide an example.

In the subject raised, I don't see the shill angle (acting as a decoy in the promotion of an illicit operation). I'm not taking sides on this issue, and have no dog in the hunt, but it does appear to have gotten somewhat personal.

 

Kirkland, you may recall how I got after someone who tended to invent denominations and run either shabby or totally spurious seminaries within a "Christian" context. That person has to all appearances cleaned up their act; well and good. I now welcome cordially their contributions and appreciate many of their insights.

The wehemu speaks on her own website (see links above) about offering denominational status and ordination via the internet to temples and shemsus of her religion. I have no quarrel with that. I know little about her religion and for all I know in ancient Egypt wehemus ordained shemsus by post or courier. She also runs a seminary with no discernible accreditation, credentialing, etc., pushing said school over the internet. She also, despite claiming a doctorate and running a seminary, refuses to do the simplest academic task of all: document the source of a quote.

That is where it becomes a public concern in the first order.

It becomes a public concern in the second order by her fostering the obsession with Union which is unhealthy and provides (if you observe the "other" forum) the cantus firmus for a whole tessitura of lies about this forum, its posters, and DL in general.

It becomes a public concern of the third order by virtue of her attacks on Bruce and others, which do indeed resemble (perhaps accidentally) the behaviour of mill shills.

Now, as far as homemade cheesehead sects go, who am I of all people to complain? The wehemu's neighbours, the Lawsonomists--there's whack jobs for you.

 

But it ain't yes yet. And until it is, the biography I cited in my original questioning of Renee's biographical sketch is blatantly misleading. As much a whack job as Renee herself. (Yes, I was the one who came up with that delightful description.)

Nice to know, despite my retirement from this field, that I haven't lost my discerning touch when it comes to bullshitters in higher education.

One can only wonder why Renee is so obsessed and preoccupied with Union, since she is neither a Union learner nor alumna herself. So far, in her illustrious debut on degreeinfo.com, she has shown herself to be so single issue that she is, at best, shallow. Indeed, her insignificance in this field is one reason I feel no need to comment on the Union issue itself. (Been there, done that.)

Renee, schveetheart, methinks that your "15 minutes" are just about up.

Hmmmmmmm . . . Homemade cheesecake sects - I like that one, janko.

 

I admittedly haven’t followed this thread, but ...

Wouldn’t that constitute harassment? Does anything in the TOS require members to provide you with verifiable academic information? I don’t believe that anyone here is under a duty to disclose their private student records.

If you don't believe someone who posts here, that is fine. However, I think it would be inappropriate for you to pester someone in to turning over personal information. Just my opinion.

 

I don't know that you are in any position to call someone a whack job. Aren't you the same 'person' who talks about making milk shakes with the bodies of dead (aborted) babies? 'Methinks' you 'might' just be a hypocrite.

 

Greetings

FYI, My IP was banned. I am at a different one at the moment.

What is clear here is that there was some really good conversation happening...especially between myself and Rich Douglas. Despite Bruce permitting all the silly adhominem attacks and engaing in harassment --I answered his question.

What is clear to me is that there is difference here between those like myself whose interest in the traditional Liberal Arts education..and those happy with the current professonal watered down degrees accredited institutions of higher education now offer.

I have never seen a group of faculty from real colleges so obsessed with credentials. Those educated in scholarly rather than professional fields are far more concerned with the quality of argument and discussion than what degree one holds.

There is a growing split in higher education between those who advocate traditional liberal education and those who see "general education" in the service of professional training.

Humanities faculty are less concerned with accreditation than those in the professions. We have seen accreditation work. We have also seen it function to water down education to certain mechanical rules in the name of "method" and "assessment".

Kaplan College and Saint Leo's are both accredited institutions. Yet, none of my colleagues who teach at these schools believe students get the equivalent of in person college education.

On the other hand, students at my little Church related seminary have training that compares favorably to the strongest seminaries in the country

I would put my students up against any in philosophy and Religious Studies and Theology in hermeneutics and history and phenomenology of religion. They pay almost nothing We loose money and contribute most of our own funds. If that consititutes a degree mill than I am proud to have founded one

In addition my students cannot be ordained without the appropriate _secular_ credentials for their area of ministry. For example, if they want to do counseling they must enroll in an accredited program and obtain that credential and get state license etc. Of course if they could show us a program that was rigorous and clearly equivalent and which would legally allow them to practice without that credential-- we would be glad to consider that as well.

Students coming to us from accredited programs and colleges who did not have a strong liberal arts preparation are unlikely to be able to do the work we require until they obtain training in philosophy, literature which would enable them to succeed.

The idea that this is a degree mill is so very silly. Remember church schools do NOT need to be licensed or accredited. And to be licensed or accredited they need to have been in existence for a certain period of time and actually graduate some people

Will we ever go in that direction. It is hard to say. I used to say yes absolutely. I am not sure. Much will depend on the direction of higher education and accreditation and all which is in a lot of flux right now. I do suspect hat the backlash against humanities will also have a counter-reaction. Just how it will play out in the next 5-10 years as my seminary becomes more established- I do not know. None of us do.

What I can say is that no student behaving as the moderators and regulars here have would be considered for Priesthood in our tradition.

Those who think they are the opponents of fallicious degree mills and are supporting Union's misrepresentation for 30 years need to take a look in the mirror-- A real look.

You are so caught up in the credentials you have forgotten why they matter and whatthey are in place to protect.

Take Care

Rev Renee

 

But doesn't your own broadside attack on the Union Institute revolve around the precise wording on its diplomas?

How does being "humanities faculty" lead to the conclusion that accreditation isn't important? That seems to be a major non-sequitur.

You know Renee, if you want to believe that, fine. If your students want to believe that the education that they receive from you is valuable, then that's fine too. But why should anyone outside your tiny Kemetic circle agree with you?

That's the whole point of accreditation.

All the exemptions mean is that the schools are unregulated. There's no suggestion that unregulated schools must somehow be good.

If you think that blasting away at Union can make the world safe for non-accredited schools, then you are piling non-sequiturs one atop another.

 

Nobody who can't--or can't be bothered--to verify a quote has any business running a school. I am, however, pleased to know that nobody who behaves the way we do could be ordained in the wehemu's erm tradition. Critical thinking, cordial discussion when cordiality is shown, desiring verification of credentials when rank is pulled, failure to submit blindly to self-constructed authority, insistence on clarity of expression: these were virtual prerequisites when I was ordained. But traditions differ, I spose. Think of our bad behaviour as fostering religious diversity.

Somewhere, Emmanuel Schikaneder is smiling.

 

Hi Bill:

You ask:

But doesn't your own broadside attack on the Union Institute revolve around the precise wording on its diplomas?
-----------------------------------------------
No it is not an issue of the wording of diplomas but of misrepresentation to students and to the US government.

It is not about wording but the actual degree offered.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humanities faculty are less concerned with accreditation than those in the professions. We have seen accreditation work. We have also seen it function to water down education to certain mechanical rules in the name of "method" and "assessment".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How does being "humanities faculty" lead to the conclusion that accreditation isn't important? That seems to be a major non-sequitur.

-------------------
I never said accrditation is not important. First the quote above was made in the context of Bruce's threatening and harassing behaviors in a conversation. I have not seen faculty from liberal arts colleges or Universities so concerned to know what degree someone has to engage in a conversation about education. I have also not seen the same knee jerk concern about those of us who use our clerical titles rather than "Doctor" even in secular universities

Accreditation is another issue entirely. What I said about it was not throw it out the drain but that it had for many reasons started to go in a direction where it does not serve its original purposes. The nonsense faculty are asked to do often has no relationship to quality (or the lack of quality) of instruction.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the other hand, students at my little Church related seminary have training that compares favorably to the strongest seminaries in the country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know Renee, if you want to believe that, fine. If your students want to believe that the education that they receive from you is valuable, then that's fine too. But why should anyone outside your tiny Kemetic circle agree with you?
-------------------------------

How do I say this..Why should I care? And those who deal with my students at conferences and see the work they produce in the field and know anything at all about the field would be impressed. In fact they have been On the other hand, there is no reason anyone should assume quality or lack of quality to a church school they know nothing about (Besides the fact that at this point we are so small we are irrelevant on that level and make no grand claims and have not offered a single "degree" and no one has yet made ordination through the program.

Whether it "should" get "official recognition" is a matter way too early in its history to answer in any responsible manner.

Of course the only people interested at this point would be those who feel called to serve in our church

<<That's the whole point of accreditation.>>

Well originally it was supposed to be peer review and all about quality and protecting students and potential students.

Union is accredited and that has not prevented any of the issues it is supposed to ensure


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea that this is a degree mill is so very silly. Remember church schools do NOT need to be licensed or accredited.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All the exemptions mean is that the schools are unregulated. There's no suggestion that unregulated schools must somehow be good.

_____

Agreed. Nor does it mean they are bad. ;-) It does mean that we live in a country that respects the right of religious groups to develop its own training programs and systems. Obviously the character of these will vary tremendously as will quality


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those who think they are the opponents of fallicious degree mills and are supporting Union's misrepresentation for 30 years need to take a look in the mirror-- A real look.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you think that blasting away at Union can make the world safe for non-accredited schools, then you are piling non-sequiturs one atop another.
------------------

The point here is not to make anything safe for accredited or non accredited schools. The whole system needs reform

However Union's accreditation has not served to protect its students or Alumni. Accreditation alone is not a good criteria.
Now, I would say that I have felt that the Higher Learning Commission has indeed raised most of the right issues in this case. Yet 30 years is a long time to wait to raise issues. Few schools are ever placed on notice or probation no less removed from accreditation.

I do understand that cases like Union may seem small in light of all the real degree mills offering diplomas for no or little work and taking off with the money while providing no value to the students. And I do understand that that is happening on such a scale that it is a huge problem.

At the same time I would hate to see this create the sort of parnoia we have seen in this thread towards me because I direct the educational programs of my Church. And I would hate to see it create a situation where liberal arts and humanities institutions and great books programs have no place to stand except among the well established Ivy league and little Ivy schools with minimal access to the general public.

At present that is happening as more and more schools go with the Market and see Great Books (past and Present) as irrelevant to todays educational needs.

Best
Rev Renee