+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    oxpecker is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,379

    dcmilitary.com article on diploma mills


  2. #2
    MarkIsrael@aol.com is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,863
    The Army will not recognize a degree from a non-accredited school, said Adams.
    Then why do they recognize these degrees from Columbia State University?
    http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/daa/2004_Catalog.pdf
    http://www.80asg.army.mil/Community/...0life/Bio.html

    And these degrees from Summit University and Almeda College & University?
    http://www.aphill.army.mil/group.asp

    And this degree from Hamilton University?
    http://www4.army.mil/USAR/soldiers/a.../states/md.htm

  3. #3
    Rich Douglas is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    11,356
    Originally posted by MarkIsrael@aol.com
    Then why do they recognize these degrees from Columbia State University?
    http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/daa/2004_Catalog.pdf
    http://www.80asg.army.mil/Community/...0life/Bio.html

    And these degrees from Summit University and Almeda College & University?
    http://www.aphill.army.mil/group.asp

    And this degree from Hamilton University?
    http://www4.army.mil/USAR/soldiers/a.../states/md.htm
    The first link is to a catalog, hardly an official form of recognition. The person in question has listed a CSU bachelor's and a Webster University master's. This could be a typo. If not, one wonders how/why this person was admitted to Webster.

    The second is a link to a webpage with a bio, hardly an official form of recognition.

    The third is a newspaper-syle bio, hardly an official form of recognition. So is the forth, same caution.

    These are publicity efforts, not examples of personnel records. There is no form of official recognition of these degrees. (Normally, quasi-military publications contain a statement about being non-official. I didn't look in these cases.) What it boils down to is that these people are using their fake degrees and no one is checking on them. But that's not the same as the Army recognizing them.

  4. #4
    MarkIsrael@aol.com is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,863
    So are we to believe that while the military shows a flawed face to the public, its internal processes are working perfectly? That it commemorates that which it does not recognize?

    Well, I've never served in the military, so I'll take your word for it.

  5. #5
    Rich Douglas is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    11,356
    Originally posted by MarkIsrael@aol.com
    So are we to believe that while the military shows a flawed face to the public, its internal processes are working perfectly? That it commemorates that which it does not recognize?

    Well, I've never served in the military, so I'll take your word for it.
    No, what it means is that none of these sources are "the military." They're PR sites and informational sites, most operated without any involvement by the military. That doesn't absolve them from doing a little homework, of course. But it's not the same as saying the Army "recognizes" the subjects' degrees (for promotion, say).

    It would be simple to, say, put a fake degree in one's bio appearing on a non-offical site. It would be quite the same, however, to get it past records officials who are tasked with verifying education credentials.

    A better example would be a policy that stated such degrees are recognized. But we know better than to expect that, right? It's because the Army does not recognize degree mills.

  6. #6
    decimon is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    4,209
    Originally posted by MarkIsrael@aol.com
    So are we to believe that while the military shows a flawed face to the public, its internal processes are working perfectly? That it commemorates that which it does not recognize?

    Well, I've never served in the military, so I'll take your word for it.
    Nothing I've encounters works anywhere near perfectly, wherever that is. And the Army is but the first federal agency, so...

    I did encounter one perfect system while in the Army in the form of something called a Parts Load List. The PLL was an early computerized system that guaranteed you had precisely the right parts, no more and no less. We had both more and less. The only hope for straightening the thing out would have been a field excercise allowing for a mass writeoff and reordering of parts.

    Now you are a veteran.

    As a veteran you might want to consider that they are likely looking forward with this policy and not backward. Back there lies too many skeletons to be cataloged.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15