Do the accomplishents of a graduate not prove the worth of his/her school? Case in point: James R. White, much published apologist, and holder of the ThD (and ThM?) from the unaccredited CES. He is accomplishing more than many grads, including me, of accredited schools! So, he must have had a great learning experience at CES, right? So, should not any judgment of all unaccredited schools and of the educational experiences of all students at all UA schools be postponed until the quality of grads of these can be known by their works? If a grad is indeed successful, then that certifies the quality of his learning-not so?
It's not the National Test Pilot's School Pigeons can fly, but they don't learn that at the Branford Academy Preparatory High School. So it would not be meaninful to associate their level of adult accomplishment with their contact with the Branford Academy. That's an extreme case, of course! G
A single accomplished individual does not a Harvard make but multiple accomplished individuals would be a good indication of quality.
Re: It's not the National Test Pilot's School == Extreme, yes, but could your metaphorical logic not also be a failure to recognize distinctions and even be a bit of cavalier dismissal? The pigeon does not use schooling to fly , but people use schooling to succeed! If , therefore, one before said education is not very "successful" but after is successful, what reasoning can be employed that does not attribute that success to the learning? I'm not saying that a convincing argument cannot be developed which shows a fallacy in my thesis. I'm just saying that allusions to pigeons may not do that. Or if pigeons do show that, then how?
== I think that example is flawed. Again it deals in extremes! Must schools be old and big to be good? A school may have quality but not be a Harvard! And, if the program of a tiny UA school produces but a few successes, that should be deemed as evidential. Why should it not? Even if a famous philosopher teaches but one student on the swing of his front porch, and that one student writes successful books on philosophy, then how can the quality of that education be denied? Just because it didn't happen at Harvard?
Look at the other side, one successful individual does not make a school, as there are many succesufl people who did not go to school. What could that successful peson have done, with proper guidance and support? Another look would be how many successful individuals did an accredited school produce (even if they are not the same caliber but generally above avergae) did an accredited school produce during the same time that the unaccredited school produced one success.
I consider successful graduates to be data points. They suggest credibility but they certainly don't prove it. The author of a fine work might have shopped it to a degree-mill in search of a vanity doctorate or something. Probably the same approach needs to be taken with impressive faculty, with recognition by professional organizations, with collaborations, with awards and grants won, with publications and participation at scholarly meetings, and so on. There probably isn't any single bit of data that would allow us to identify credible schools with absolute certainty. Mistakes happen and sometimes 'experts' prove to be appallingly credulous. But taken together, the different data points combine like pixels to generate a recognizable picture. The more data points, the clearer the image and the more reliable it becomes. It's what I've called a "footprint" and it's why I like to Google schools. But I don't think that it can be reduced to an algorithm. Not all data points are created equal. We are all going to assign different weights to different things. Some data points are tremendously impressive (Nobel prizes, perhaps), others are much less so. There's probably an element of taste and aesthetics to it.
In the case of James White, I suspect that we are dealing with a rather intelligent individual and that whatever work he did at CES had less to do with his success than his intellect. I think CES was simply a union card backing up what he already had cerebrally. There is no doubt his is bright but frankly his web site gets on my nerves. He seems based on what he has to not only enjoy debate but be loathe to accept defeat when debating judges score him as losing. On top of that his pictures of himself before and after working out and styling and profiling in his "Oakley's" (which brand name he wants you to know) crack me up. I do not quite understand why White did not go the way of his mentor and do a South African doctorate. UNIZUL would have been inexpensive and J. White could have likely pulled of a great dissertation. North
Hey I just visited White's web site and he cleaned his biography up to take out the "I luv me" pictures. On top of that he earned another degree from Columbia Evangelical Seminary (a DMin in 2002). North
Bill, An excellent topic! However, in White's case, we are not looking at an individual who has one clear-cut set of graduate experiences. He already had an M.A. from the accredited and rigorous Fuller Theological Seminary prior to entering Faraston/C.E.S. Rightly dividing the influences of Fuller and C.E.S. might not be possible. I would suggest that a master's degree alone from a tough school such as Fuller would serve a diligent student well enough to do what White has done. Saying that his accomplishments wouldn't require the foundation of a doctoral program, good or bad, is not intended to take away from the man. I think we sometimes tend here to focus too much on doctoral pedigrees. Over the last several years, I have been much impressed with arguments articulated here by those without doctoral degrees. Dave
Bill G.: "Doing a dissertation is far different and much more demading than doing MA or MDiv coursework or ThM coursework / thesis in my experience. I think my work from the 60s and 90s is much unlike my work now!" I agree, and am not trying to equate the difficulty of those degrees. But does White's work require a doctoral degree, rigorous or not? I believe that Josh McDowell and Ravi Zacharias, possess only the M.Div. degree, from Talbot Theological Seminary and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, respectively. Greg Koukl has only the M.A. from Biola. Yet all have a reputation as articulate and effective apologists for the historic Christian faith. What I am driving at here is that the Fuller M.A. may have prepared him adequately for the needs of his work, so that ascertaining the advantages of the subsequent doctoral degree is difficult. If the C.E.S. program was dross, his Fuller M.A. would still have given him the tools to be functional in the field, and benefit from independent study. If C.E.S.'s program was great and beneficial, it may have given him some extra tools surpassing the needs of his work, but that might not be very visible. I still think your original concept is worth exploring. Perhaps you might find a more clear-cut example to test your premise on? Bill G.: "Perhaps a masters would enable White to do what he does. Then one might ask, so why do CES?" You know you won't find me arguing for that particular endeavor.
Multiple "accomplished individuals" shop at Wal-Mart. Does this indicate that shopping at Wal-Mart provides a quality education?
Sure: in how to target small town independent businesses and downtown areas for destruction all over the country.
Re: Re: The Proof is in the Pudding? === Howard I'm sorry that you do not respond when asked for a clarification. That would seem to be the best way to interact here. Supposing that some reader might also be confused I'll answer your question as well as I can without further qualification by you: My thread does have roots in personal experience. My unaccredited BA from Linda Vista I think is partially validated by later studies and work. It got me into the RA Point Loma masters and the 5th year Standard Teaching credential through the RA USD. The states of Calif and Oregon recognized the UA LV BA work in certifying me in regular and special education . Over a period of 35 years three school districts have based my salary on an unaccredited BA. So, the LV BA is validated IMO. But I agree with Bill Dayson that there are multiple points by which unaccredited schools should be validated , but I think few schools would be. But my post has no direct connection to my current status or study of which I'm aware. And as you do not answer my question I assume neither are you confident of any connection. I don't have to worry about comparing myself to the likes of a James White. He is much more accomplished and successful than I will ever be. I enjoy no fame now nor do I expect the UZ award, if I achieve it, to change that. In that sense, success is not my ambition. I'm too old to plan to be famous. Of course, I would not reject any pushing of fame on me, and I have even thought about writing a series of eschatological novels in an attempt to garner it . But success in achieving a doc in a genuine school is an ambition of mine. Unizul needs no validation from me to indicate that it is genuine. Unizul has the full status of a public university and is regulated by an act of Parliament. Its degrees are certified by the South African Qualificatations Authority. Therefore, the University and its awards have full international recognition. The profs in the UZ Dept of Religion and Theology are qualified by degrees and by ongoing research. The program of instruction in terms of entry requirements and curricula are similar to other SA institutions and some UK models as well. To enter the UZ doc requires an accredited masters, languages as needed, and a credible plan to research. One doesn't enter Unizul with his thesis already done or unequipped to do it. Of course my ambition was under the control of my poor finances and mobility. Mobility is somewhat improved as in two days I am fully retired! My Unizul doc is inexpensive and by DL. I have no delusions that in some American academic contexts the Unizul doc would be not viewed as the equivalent of a DTS or a TEDS doc. Nevertheless, I don't feel either that my preparation to do doc research is deficient ,[ my RA /ATS ThM is 120 grad units, two languages, thesis], or that that my research itself is deficit. It may be presumptuous of me to think that I can validate my own Unizul work--but to some extent I think that I can. The perimeters of my research are stated to include the evangelical persuasion. So, I am not attempting to evidence the existence of the Christian God or the authority of the Christian Scriptures in their autographa to determine true doctrine. These and otherassumptions are made. By a discussion of cognate doctrines I am attempting to refute a position common in creeds and traditions on trinal relationships. I just finished two chapters on the incarnational effects as incarnational issues are cognate to my topic. Regarding these issues , first, I think I know whether or not I have included a sufficient historical review and critique of the various ancient and modern positions expressed on the incarnation as Chalcedon, Constantinople, Wiley, Leonitius , Waheeb, Sarkissian, Theodoret of Cyprus, Warfield, Miley, Shedd, Buswell, Erickson, AB Bruce, Dorner, Hodge, Clark, Baille , Apollinarius, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, Tertulliian, Theodore of Mopseuestia, Cyril, Agatho, Leo, Nestorius and others. I think I can judge that reviewing aspect of my work. That is Historical Theology. Second, I think that I have synthesized the theological issues of the incarnation with other ones as the immutability of God in His attributes and essence which preclude a metamorphosis into man or even a divesting of attributes in order to be to be confined in a human mind or body and as well with what constitutes true humanity as mind and will and entity. This is opposed to Jesus's humanity being a collection of behavior patterns or God merely using human attributes and calling that " man." Also I think I can judge that synthesizing aspect of my work. That is Systematic Theology. Third, I think that I have exegetically responded to the most relevant Scriptures which connect to these problems and that I have interacted with the syntactical and lexical issues which connect to each of these texts. Some of these interactions are fairly intricate as the import of the change of tense in Hebrews 5:8 and the significance there of kaiper and some require too very extended discussions as did the 20 or so pages on defining the relationship between form of God and equality with God in Philippians 2. I think I can also judge that exegetical aspect of my work. That is Biblical Theology. But my work at Unizul does not stand on my judgment-if it does stand at all. It is and will be reviewed by four full professors at four different schools. Three formal at SA universities and one informal at a school in the USA. This, ie, a true evaluation of a student's work by truly qualified evaluators, is a feature which I take to be one of the points which should be in Bill Dayson's list of what validates a school. So, my answer to your question is "no."
